Jon Rappoport ~ Why Do They Try So Hard to End Freedom?

I love this article by Jon. It’s a simple reminder of why freedom is worth fighting for — on all levels: “mind, body, soul, imagination, and love.”

Some people find Jon’s style a little — or a lot — too in-your-face, but I happen to enjoy his deep appreciation for and devotion to those sacred, precious things all too often tossed away as worthless junk or unimportant words and concepts. Personally, I get his outrage at sacrilege and tyranny, and I love that he champions the Imagination and the full potential of humanity. Jon’s an artist and a writer, and he recognizes subtleties. He knows when something feels off, and he’s not afraid to discover why. He’s also not afraid to use his own creative power to change it.

“Men often become what they believe themselves to be. If I believe I cannot do something, it makes me incapable of doing it. But when I believe I can, then I acquire the ability to do it even if I didn’t have it in the beginning.” ~Mahatma Ghandi

I love how Jon reminds us who we are and what we can do.

Jon Rappoport ~ Why Do They Try So Hard to End Freedom?

I have several answers to that question.

The people who run the people who run things want to own everything.

To them, freedom is another thing to own. So they want it. And they want it all for themselves.

Second, they realize that people who have freedom will not want the kind of world being lowered on them, and with freedom, those rebels may just find a way to keep the planned future from happening. So…better to close all doors.

All the phony political talk about “we’re in this together” is a blatant attempt to promote the idea that freedom is a small thing that must be sacrificed. For the greater good.

The people who run things from the top believe that freedom can be owned, because they can’t think of anything that can’t be owned. That’s their view. That’s the way they see life and the world.

That puts them at a strategic advantage. They focus all their energies on buying and selling. The holdouts among us are those who have values that can’t be displayed like cars in a showroom. Values that can’t be argued for in commercial language. Values that are ultimately non-material.

Holding the value of freedom gives us one advantage. We’re not competing against similar products in the marketplace. We’re competing against one thing only: slavery.

In one way or another, I have been writing about mind control for 30 years. It’s the doorway into slavery. It’s an attempt to wipe out everything that freedom means—most of all, how much it means.

Whatever humans can accomplish, the platform for it is liberty.

To say that freedom carries too much potential for abuse is like arguing that oceans are too dangerous and should be outlawed.

The so-called philosophies that replace freedom try to paint their conclusions with inevitability, and they all fail. From Plato to Marx, they begin with statements of what is possible “if only people would recognize the truth.” Their utopias, when played out, produce tyranny over mind, body, and soul. The cost of perfection.

Behind every good thing you or I or anyone has accomplished, there was the space of freedom. It’s almost a truism, it’s so obvious. But because it’s so obvious, we tend to ignore it.

Now, strong advocates of freedom are looked upon, by the government, as potentially dangerous people. They are demeaned in every possible way. If that doesn’t give you a clue about where government is heading, try reading the piece of paper called the Constitution, and then compare the statements in that document with the present scope of government and come to a decision.

As an aside, try finding a serious college course that does exactly that comparison in great detail. Good luck.

Freedom is out; the collective is in.

Our petty leaders, the dupes and mules for the future over the hill, are humping the ultimate prize, freedom, which they will lay at the feet of their masters. They will do it gladly, because they can sell all the programs and systems and laws and regulations that add up to no-freedom. It’s easy. They believe it’s workable. And the less freedom that exists, they more power they, the dupes, have, and the bigger their principalities. They’re mercenaries.

Here’s a principle you won’t find in a college economics course: the free market can only exist when the participants have non-material values that conspire to produce good relations among people. In the absence of that, anything and everything can be bought and sold, including the right to be free.

This, of course, ties in with the elite philosophy of ownership.

If we give up our values, some distant future historian will write: “Those people believed in a myth of great men who had much money, much power. Demi-gods. The demi-gods appeared and approached the people with an offer. Sell us your freedom. What is your price? And the people named a price and the bargain was struck. The people were satisfied. They reasoned that what they were trading was a thing, an item, a kind of product, which, were it not for the demi-gods, could never be sold. In a way, the people were mesmerized by what they had been able to accomplish with that sale. Ironically, they were so deluded because they had allowed themselves to grow fat on freedom…”

Mind, body, soul, imagination, and love all exist on the basis that freedom is there — or if it isn’t, it must be fought for.

Jon Rappoport

2 responses to this post.

  1. Reblogged this on Spirit In Action and commented:
    Thank you for posting this, Laura. I have often wondered why so much in philosophy and govt was so pointlessly limited. It was always either/ or; you can choose communism or capitalism for instance. Based on who controls “the means of production” as if “production” is the point of LIFE. (Life is the point, love, connection, nature, joy-money, production etc have always only been TOOLS and imho should never be goals.
    I don’t agree with Jon that we have to choose between freedom/liberty and the collective tho I love this essay and agree overall. That is false dichotomy. Tribal people have BOTH more freedom and liberty than any colonized citizen of the post industrial technosphere AND more devotion to the collective.
    Unity is not just a trendy spiritual term to most noncolonized beings. It is an essential reality that is lived day to day, moment to moment. I am because you are-how can we make choices based on our own so called freedom that harm others? It is a false freedom to be free to make such choices but the place for the “control” that limits such choices is not the govt or any external source if pressure. It is our own inherent awareness of our collective being. Colonization wotked hard to stesl that awareness in order to create a slave society with hierarchy. When we KNOW in our hearts we are all ONE how cou ld we participate in harming or enslaving anyone? The drive towstd collective care and community based responsibility is not the enemy of freedom. It is the only ws y we csn ever achieve freedom because as long as people choose hate, violence, cruelty and harm to others some will always rise against these things and try to stop them-hence the seeming endless but false duality between collective good and freedom. Transcending the false duality we can easily see true freedom is based in love and respect for all living beings.



    • In other articles, Jon makes a distinction between The Collective and “Community.” There’s a difference. The Collective is like the Borg, devouring individuals and stripping them of their uniqueness, whereas Community evolves naturally and organically, usually locally and honors the individual gifts, desires and needs of each person. I’ve also addressed this topic in the essay, “Uniquely You, Divinely One” :

      Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I think this is one of the most important lines in Jon’s article: “the free market can only exist when the participants have non-material values that conspire to produce good relations among people. In the absence of that, anything and everything can be bought and sold, including the right to be free.” Essentially, he’s saying what you’re saying about “how could we participate in harming or enslaving anyone?” He’s just advocating that this awareness come from within rather than in a top down tyrannical “Big Brother knows best” approach or in a New Age Borg method of consuming everything and watering it down into one uniform, parasitic blob of “Consciousness.”



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: