ANYONE READ this?????? Escaping the Matrix

[Guest guest]

I read it- I thought it was great. Extremely depressing and scary, but

not surprising...

--

Reverend Breezy s - Facilitator, Blissful Hearth School

Lady Lasairíona of Creavanore - Seneschal, Shire of Hrafnsfjordr, Oertha, West

{{What’s right is not always popular;

What’s popular is not always right.}}

~“None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free.”~

-Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

" To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to

stand by our President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but

is morally treasonable to the American public. "

-Theodore Roosevelt

[Guest guest]

Please, I can't stress this enough - READ THIS.

You will see that all politicians are the same in manipulating us

PLEASE READ and when you have tell this list that you have and what you think

Sheri

I encourage you to print this out and really read it.

http://cyberjournal.org/cj/rkm/WE/jun00Matrix.shtml

summer 2000

Escaping the Matrix By RICHARD K. MOORE

The defining dramatic moment in the film The Matrix occurs just after

Morpheus invites Neo to choose between a red pill and a blue pill. The red

pill promises “the truth, nothing more.” Neo takes the red pill and

awakes to reality – something utterly different from anything Neo, or the

audience, could have expected. What Neo had assumed to be reality turned

out to be only a collective illusion, fabricated by the Matrix and fed to a

population that is asleep, cocooned in grotesque embryonic pods. In

Plato’s famous parable about the shadows on the walls of the cave, true

reality is at least reflected in perceived reality. In the Matrix world,

true reality and perceived reality exist on entirely different planes.

The story is intended as metaphor, and the parallels that drew my attention

had to do with political reality. This article offers a particular

perspective on what’s going on in the world – and how things got to be

that way – in this era of globalisation. From that red-pill perspective,

everyday media-consensus reality – like the Matrix in the film – is

seen to be a fabricated collective illusion. Like Neo, I didn’t know what

I was looking for when my investigation began, but I knew that what I was

being told didn’t make sense. I read scores of histories and biographies,

observing connections between them, and began to develop my own theories

about roots of various historical events. I found myself largely in

agreement with writers like Noam Chomsky and Parenti, but I also

perceived important patterns that others seem to have missed.

When I started tracing historical forces, and began to interpret

present-day events from a historical perspective, I could see the same old

dynamics at work and found a meaning in unfolding events far different from

what official pronouncements proclaimed. Such pronouncements are, after

all, public relations fare, given out by politicians who want to look good

to the voters. Most of us expect rhetoric from politicians, and take what

they say with a grain of salt. But as my own picture of present reality

came into focus, “grain of salt” no longer worked as a metaphor. I

began to see that consensus reality – as generated by official rhetoric

and amplified by mass media – bears very little relationship to actual

reality. “The matrix” was a metaphor I was ready for.

In consensus reality (the blue-pill perspective) “left” and “right”

are the two ends of the political spectrum. Politics is a tug-of-war

between competing factions, carried out by political parties and elected

representatives. Society gets pulled this way and that within the political

spectrum, reflecting the interests of whichever party won the last

election. The left and right are therefore political enemies. Each side is

convinced that it knows how to make society better; each believes the other

enjoys undue influence; and each blames the other for the political

stalemate that apparently prevents society from dealing effectively with

its problems.

This perspective on the political process, and on the roles of left and

right, is very far from reality. It is a fabricated collective illusion.

Morpheus tells Neo that the Matrix is “the world that was pulled over

your eyes to hide you from the truth.... As long as the Matrix exists,

humanity cannot be free.” Consensus political reality is precisely such a

matrix. Later we will take a fresh look at the role of left and right, and

at national politics. But first we must develop our red-pill historical

perspective. I’ve had to condense the arguments to bare essentials;

please see the annotated sources at the end for more thorough treatments of

particular topics.

Imperialism and the Matrix

>From the time of Columbus to 1945, world affairs were largely dominated by

competition among Western nations seeking to stake out spheres of

influence, control sea lanes, and exploit colonial empires. Each Western

power became the core of an imperialist economy whose periphery was managed

for the benefit of the core nation. Military might determined the scope of

an empire; wars were initiated when a core nation felt it had sufficient

power to expand its periphery at the expense of a competitor. Economies and

societies in the periphery were kept backward – to keep their populations

under control, to provide cheap labour, and to guarantee markets for goods

manufactured in the core. Imperialism robbed the periphery not only of

wealth but also of its ability to develop its own societies, cultures, and

economies in a natural way for local benefit.

The driving force behind Western imperialism has always been the pursuit of

economic gain, ever since Isabella commissioned Columbus on his first

entrepreneurial voyage. The rhetoric of empire concerning wars, however,

has typically been about other things – the White Man’s Burden,

bringing true religion to the heathens, Manifest Destiny, defeating the

Yellow Peril or the Hun, seeking lebensraum, or making the world safe for

democracy. Any fabricated motivation for war or empire would do, as long as

it appealed to the collective consciousness of the population at the time.

The propaganda lies of yesterday were recorded and became consensus history

– the fabric of the matrix.

While the costs of territorial empire (fleets, colonial administrations,

etc.) were borne by Western taxpayers generally, the profits of imperialism

were enjoyed primarily by private corporations and investors. Government

and corporate elites were partners in the business of imperialism: empires

gave government leaders power and prestige, and gave corporate leaders

power and wealth. Corporations ran the real business of empire while

government leaders fabricated noble excuses for the wars that were required

to keep that business going. Matrix reality was about patriotism, national

honour, and heroic causes; true reality was on another plane altogether:

that of economics.

Industrialisation, beginning in the late 1700s, created a demand for new

markets and increased raw materials; both demands spurred accelerated

expansion of empire. Wealthy investors amassed fortunes by setting up

large-scale industrial and trading operations, leading to the emergence of

an influential capitalist elite. Like any other elite, capitalists used

their wealth and influence to further their own interests however they

could. And the interests of capitalism always come down to economic growth;

investors must reap more than they sow or the whole system comes to a

grinding halt.

Thus capitalism, industrialisation, nationalism, warfare, imperialism –

and the matrix – coevolved. Industrialised weapon production provided the

muscle of modern warfare, and capitalism provided the appetite to use that

muscle. Government leaders pursued the policies necessary to expand empire

while creating a rhetorical matrix, around nationalism, to justify those

policies. Capitalist growth depended on empire, which in turn depended on a

strong and stable core nation to defend it. National interests and

capitalist interests were inextricably linked – or so it seemed for more

than two centuries.

World War II and Pax Americana

1945 will be remembered as the year World War II ended and the bond of the

atomic nucleus was broken. But 1945 also marked another momentous fission

– breaking of the bond between national and capitalist interests. After

every previous war, and in many cases after severe devastation, European

nations had always picked themselves back up and resumed their competition

over empire. But after World War II, a Pax Americana was established. The

US began to manage all the Western peripheries on behalf of capitalism

generally, while preventing the communist powers from interfering in the

game. Capitalist powers no longer needed to fight over investment realms,

and competitive imperialism was replaced by collective imperialism (see

sidebar). Opportunities for capital growth were no longer linked to the

military power of nations, apart from the power of America. In his Killing

Hope, U.S. Military and CIA Interventions since World War II (see

recommended reading), Blum chronicles hundreds of significant

covert and overt interventions, showing exactly how the US carried out its

imperial management role.

In the postwar years matrix reality diverged ever further from actual

reality. In the postwar matrix world, imperialism had been abandoned and

the world was being “democratised”; in the real world, imperialism had

become better organised and more efficient. In the matrix world the US

“restored order,” or “came to the assistance” of nations which were

being “undermined by Soviet influence”; in the real world, the

periphery was being systematically suppressed and exploited. In the matrix

world, the benefit was going to the periphery in the form of countless aid

programs; in the real world, immense wealth was being extracted from the

periphery.

Growing glitches in the matrix weren’t noticed by most people in the

West, because the postwar years brought unprecedented levels of Western

prosperity and social progress. The rhetoric claimed progress would come to

all, and Westerners could see it being realised in their own towns and

cities. The West became the collective core of a global empire, and

exploitative development led to prosperity for Western populations, while

generating immense riches for corporations, banks, and wealthy capital

investors.

Glitches in the Matrix, Popular Rebellion, and Neoliberalism

The parallel agenda of Third-World exploitation and Western prosperity

worked effectively for the first two postwar decades. But in the 1960s

large numbers of Westerners, particularly the young and well educated,

began to notice glitches in the matrix. In Vietnam imperialism was too

naked to be successfully masked as something else. A major split in

American public consciousness occurred, as millions of anti-war protesters

and civil-rights activists punctured the fabricated consensus of the 1950s

and declared the reality of exploitation and suppression both at home and

abroad. The environmental movement arose, challenging even the exploitation

of the natural world. In Europe, 1968 joined 1848 as a landmark year of

popular protest.

These developments disturbed elite planners. The postwar regime’s

stability was being challenged from within the core – and the formula of

Western prosperity no longer guaranteed public passivity. A report

published in 1975, the Report of the Trilateral Task Force on Governability

of Democracies, provides a glimpse into the thinking of elite circles. Alan

Wolfe discusses this report in Holly Sklar’s eye-opening Trilateralism

(see recommended reading). Wolfe focuses especially on the analysis Harvard

professor P. Huntington presented in a section of the report

entitled “The Crisis of Democracy.” Huntington is an articulate

promoter of elite policy shifts, and contributes pivotal articles to

publications such as the Council on Foreign Relations’s Foreign Affairs

(see recommended reading).

Huntington tells us that democratic societies “cannot work” unless the

citizenry is “passive.” The “democratic surge of the 1960s”

represented an “excess of democracy,” which must be reduced if

governments are to carry out their traditional domestic and foreign

policies. Huntington’s notion of “traditional policies” is expressed

in a passage from the report:

To the extent that the United States was governed by anyone during the

decades after World War II, it was governed by the President acting with

the support and cooperation of key individuals and groups in the executive

office, the federal bureaucracy, Congress, and the more important

businesses, banks, law firms, foundations, and media, which constitute the

private sector’s ‘Establishment’.

In these few words Huntington spells out the reality that electoral

democracy has little to do with how America is run, and summarises the kind

of people who are included within the elite planning community. Who needs

conspiracy theories when elite machinations are clearly described in public

documents like these?

Besides failing to deliver popular passivity, the policy of prosperity for

Western populations had another downside, having to do with Japan’s

economic success. Under the Pax Americana umbrella, Japan had been able to

industrialise and become an imperial player – the prohibition on Japanese

rearmament had become irrelevant. With Japan’s then-lower living

standards, Japanese producers could undercut prevailing prices and steal

market share from Western producers. Western capital needed to find a way

to become more competitive on world markets, and Western prosperity was

standing in the way. Elite strategists, as Huntington showed, were fully

capable of understanding these considerations, and the requirements of

corporate growth created a strong motivation to make the needed adjustments

– in both reality and rhetoric.

If popular prosperity could be sacrificed, there were many obvious ways

Western capital could be made more competitive. Production could be moved

overseas to low-wage areas, allowing domestic unemployment to rise. Unions

could be attacked and wages forced down, and people could be pushed into

temporary and part-time jobs without benefits. Regulations governing

corporate behaviour could be removed, corporate and capital-gains taxes

could be reduced, and the revenue losses could be taken out of

public-service budgets. Public infrastructures could be privatised, the

services reduced to cut costs, and then they could be milked for easy

profits while they deteriorated from neglect.

These are the very policies and programs launched during the

Reagan-Thatcher years in the US and Britain. They represent a systematic

project of increasing corporate growth at the expense of popular prosperity

and welfare. Such a real agenda would have been unpopular, and a

corresponding matrix reality was fabricated for public consumption. The

matrix reality used real terms like “deregulation,” “reduced

taxes,” and “privatisation,” but around them was woven an economic

mythology. The old, failed laissez-faire doctrine of the 1800s was

reintroduced with the help of Milton Friedman’s Chicago School of

economics, and “less government” became the proud “modern” theme in

America and Britain. Sensible regulations had restored financial stability

after the Great Depression, and had broken up anti-competitive monopolies

such as the Rockefeller trust and AT & T. But in the new matrix reality, all

regulations were considered bureaucratic interference. Reagan and Thatcher

preached the virtues of individualism, and promised to “get government

off people’s backs.” The implication was that everyday individuals were

to get more money and freedom, but in reality the primary benefits would go

to corporations and wealthy investors.

The academic term for laissez-faire economics is “economic liberalism,”

and hence the Reagan-Thatcher revolution has come to be known as the

“neoliberal revolution.” It brought a radical change in actual reality

by returning to the economic philosophy that led to sweatshops, corruption,

and robber-baron monopolies in the nineteenth century. It brought an

equally radical change in matrix reality – a complete reversal in the

attitude that was projected regarding government. Government policies had

always been criticised in the media, but the institution of government had

always been respected – reflecting the traditional bond between

capitalism and nationalism. With Reagan, we had a sitting president telling

us that government itself was a bad thing. Many of us may have agreed with

him, but such a sentiment had never before found official favour. Soon,

British and American populations were beginning to applaud the destruction

of the very democratic institutions that provided their only hope of

participation in the political process.

Globalisation and World Government

The essential bond between capitalism and nationalism was broken in 1945,

but it took some time for elite planners to recognise this new condition

and to begin bringing the world system into alignment with it. The strong

Western nation state had been the bulwark of capitalism for centuries, and

initial postwar policies were based on the assumption that this would

continue indefinitely. The Bretton Woods financial system (the IMF, World

Bank, and a system of fixed exchange rates among major currencies) was set

up to stabilise national economies, and popular prosperity was encouraged

to provide political stability. Neoliberalism in the US and Britain

represented the first serious break with this policy framework – and

brought the first visible signs of the fission of the nation-capital bond.

The neoliberal project was economically profitable in the US and Britain,

and the public accepted the matrix economic mythology. Meanwhile, the

integrated global economy gave rise to a new generation of transnational

corporations, and corporate leaders began to realise that corporate growth

was not dependent on strong core nation-states. Indeed, Western nations –

with their environmental laws, consumer-protection measures, and other

forms of regulatory “interference” – were a burden on corporate

growth. Having been successfully field tested in the two oldest

“democracies,” the neoliberal project moved onto the global stage. The

Bretton Woods system of fixed rates of currency exchange was weakened, and

the international financial system became destabilising, instead of

stabilising, for national economies. The radical free-trade project was

launched, leading eventually to the World Trade Organisation. The fission

that had begun in 1945 was finally manifesting as an explosive change in

the world system.

The objective of neoliberal free-trade treaties is to remove all political

controls over domestic and international trade and commerce. Corporations

have free rein to maximise profits, heedless of environmental consequences

and safety risks. Instead of governments regulating corporations, the WTO

now sets rules for governments, telling them what kind of beef they must

import, whether or not they can ban asbestos, and what additives they must

permit in petroleum products. So far, in every case where the WTO has been

asked to review a health, safety, or environmental regulation, the

regulation has been overturned.

Most of the world has been turned into a periphery; the imperial core has

been boiled down to the capitalist elite themselves, represented by their

bureaucratic, unrepresentative, WTO world government. The burden of

accelerated imperialism falls hardest outside the West, where loans are

used as a lever by the IMF to compel debtor nations such as Rwanda and

South Korea to accept suicidal “reform” packages. In the 1800s,

genocide was employed to clear North America and Australia of their native

populations, creating room for growth. Today, a similar program of genocide

has apparently been unleashed against sub-Saharan Africa. The IMF destroys

the economies, the CIA trains militias and stirs up tribal conflicts, and

the West sells weapons to all sides. Famine and genocidal civil wars are

the predictable and inevitable result. Meanwhile, AIDS runs rampant while

the WTO and the US government use trade laws to prevent medicines from

reaching the victims.

As in the past, Western military force will be required to control the

non-Western periphery and make adjustments to local political arrangements

when considered necessary by elite planners. The Pentagon continues to

provide the primary policing power, with NATO playing an ever-increasing

role. Resentment against the West and against neoliberalism is growing in

the Third World, and the frequency of military interventions is bound to

increase. All of this needs to be made acceptable to Western minds, adding

a new dimension to the matrix.

In the latest matrix reality, the West is called the “international

community,” whose goal is to serve “humanitarian” causes. Bill

Clinton made it explicit with his “Clinton Doctrine,” in which (as

quoted in the Washington Post) he solemnly promised, “If somebody comes

after innocent civilians and tries to kill them en masse because of their

race, their ethnic background or their religion and it is within our power

stop it, we will stop it.” This matrix fabrication is very effective

indeed; who opposes prevention of genocide? Only outside the matrix does

one see that genocide is caused by the West in the first place, that the

worst cases of genocide are continuing, that “assistance” usually makes

things worse (as in the Balkans), and that Clinton’s handy doctrine

enables him to intervene when and where he chooses. Since dictators and the

stirring of ethnic rivalries are standard tools used in managing the

periphery, a US president can always find “innocent civilians” wherever

elite plans call for an intervention.

In matrix reality, globalisation is not a project but rather the inevitable

result of beneficial market forces. Genocide in Africa is no fault of the

West, but is due to ancient tribal rivalries. Every measure demanded by

globalisation is referred to as “reform,” (the word is never used with

irony). “Democracy” and “reform” are frequently used together,

always leaving the subtle impression that one has something to do with the

other. The illusion is presented that all economic boats are rising, and if

yours isn’t, it must be your own fault: you aren’t “competitive”

enough. Economic failures are explained away as “temporary

adjustments,” or else the victim (as in South Korea or Russia) is blamed

for not being sufficiently neoliberal. “Investor confidence” is

referred to with the same awe and reverence that earlier societies might

have expressed toward the “will of the gods.”

Western quality of life continues to decline, while the WTO establishes

legal precedents ensuring that its authority will not be challenged when

its decisions become more draconian. Things will get much worse in the

West; this was anticipated in elite circles when the neoliberal project was

still on the drawing board, as is illustrated in Huntington’s

“The Crisis of Democracy” report discussed earlier.

Management of Discontented Societies

The postwar years, especially in the United States, were characterised by

consensus politics. Most people shared a common understanding of how

society worked, and generally approved of how things were going. Prosperity

was real and the matrix version of reality was reassuring. Most people

believed in it. Those beliefs became a shared consensus, and the government

could then carry out its plans as it intended, “responding” to the

programmed public will.

The “excess democracy” of the 1960s and 1970s attacked this shared

consensus from below, and neoliberal planners decided from above that

ongoing consensus wasn’t worth paying for. They accepted that segments of

society would persist in disbelieving various parts of the matrix. Activism

and protest were to be expected. New means of social control would be

needed to deal with activist movements and with growing discontent, as

neoliberalism gradually tightened the economic screws. Such means of

control were identified and have since been largely implemented,

particularly in the United States. In many ways America sets the pace of

globalisation; innovations can often be observed there before they occur

elsewhere. This is particularly true in the case of social-control

techniques.

The most obvious means of social control, in a discontented society, is a

strong, semi-militarised police force. Most of the periphery has been

managed by such means for centuries. This was obvious to elite planners in

the West, was adopted as policy, and has now been largely implemented.

Urban and suburban ghettos – where the adverse consequences of

neoliberalism are currently most concentrated – have literally become

occupied territories, where police beatings and unjustified shootings are

commonplace.

So that the beefed-up police force could maintain control in conditions of

mass unrest, elite planners also realised that much of the US Bill of

Rights would need to be neutralised. (This is not surprising, given that

the Bill’s authors had just lived through a revolution and were seeking

to ensure that future generations would have the means to organise and

overthrow any oppressive future government.) The rights-neutralisation

project has been largely implemented, as exemplified by armed midnight

raids, outrageous search-and-seizure practices, overly broad conspiracy

laws, wholesale invasion of privacy, massive incarceration, and the rise of

prison slave labour. The Rubicon has been crossed – the techniques of

oppression long common in the empire’s periphery are being imported to

the core.

In the matrix, the genre of the TV or movie police drama has served to

create a reality in which “rights” are a joke, the accused are

despicable sociopaths, and no criminal is ever brought to justice until

some noble cop or prosecutor bends the rules a bit. Government officials

bolster the construct by declaring “wars” on crime and drugs; the noble

cops are fighting a war out there in the streets – and you can’t win a

war without using your enemy’s dirty tricks. The CIA plays its role by

managing the international drug trade and making sure that ghetto drug

dealers are well supplied. In this way, the American public has been led to

accept the means of its own suppression.

The mechanisms of the police state are in place. They will be used when

necessary – as we see in ghettos and skyrocketing prison populations, as

we saw on the streets of Seattle and Washington D.C. during recent anti-WTO

demonstrations, and as is suggested by executive orders that enable the

president to suspend the Constitution and declare martial law whenever he

deems it necessary. But raw force is only the last line of defense for the

elite regime. Neoliberal planners introduced more subtle defences into the

matrix; looking at these will bring us back to our discussion of the left

and right.

Divide and rule is one of the oldest means of mass control – standard

practice since at least the Roman Empire. This is applied at the level of

modern imperialism, where each small nation competes with other for capital

investments. Within societies it works this way: If each social group can

be convinced that some other group is the source of its discontent, then

the population’s energy will be spent on inter-group struggles. The

regime can sit on the sidelines, intervening covertly to stir things up or

to guide them in desired directions. In this way most discontent can be

neutralised, and force can be reserved for exceptional cases. In the

prosperous postwar years, consensus politics served to manage the

population. Under neoliberalism, programmed factionalism has become the

front-line defense – the matrix version of divide and rule.

The covert guiding of various social movements has proven to be one of the

most effective means of programming factions and stirring them against one

another. Fundamentalist religious movements have been particularly useful.

They have been used not only within the US, but also to maximise

divisiveness in the Middle East and for other purposes throughout the

empire. The collective energy and dedication of “true believers” makes

them a potent political weapon that movement leaders can readily aim where

needed. In the US that weapon has been used to promote censorship on the

Internet, to attack the women’s movement, to support repressive

legislation, and generally to bolster the ranks of what is called in the

matrix the “right wing.”

In the matrix, the various factions believe that their competition with

each other is the process that determines society’s political agenda.

Politicians want votes, and hence the biggest and best-organised factions

should have the most influence, and their agendas should get the most

political attention. In reality there is only one significant political

agenda these days: the maximisation of capital growth through the

dismantling of society, the continuing implementation of neoliberalism, and

the management of empire. Clinton’s liberal rhetoric and his playing

around with health care and gay rights are not the result of liberal

pressure. They are rather the means by which Clinton is sold to liberal

voters, so that he can proceed with real business: getting NAFTA through

Congress, promoting the WTO, giving away the public airwaves, justifying

military interventions, and so forth. Issues of genuine importance are

never raised in campaign politics – this is a major glitch in the matrix

for those who have eyes to see it.

Escaping the Matrix

The matrix cannot fool all of the people all of the time. Under the

onslaught of globalisation, the glitches are becoming ever more difficult

to conceal – as earlier, with the Vietnam War. Last November’s

anti-establishment demonstrations in Seattle, the largest in decades, were

aimed directly at globalisation and the WTO. Even more important, Seattle

saw the coming together of factions that the matrix had programmed to fight

one another, such as left-leaning environmentalists and socially

conservative union members.

Seattle represented the tip of an iceberg. A mass movement against

globalisation and elite rule is ready to ignite, like a brush fire on a

dry, scorching day. The establishment has been expecting such a movement

and has a variety of defences at its command, including those used

effectively against the movements of the 1960s and 1970s. In order to

prevail against what seem like overwhelming odds, the movement must escape

entirely from the matrix, and it must bring the rest of society with it. As

long as the matrix exists, humanity cannot be free. The whole truth must be

faced: Globalisation is centralised tyranny; capitalism has outlasted its

sell-by date; matrix “democracy” is elite rule; and “market forces”

are imperialism. Left and right are enemies only in the matrix. In reality

we are all in this together, and each of us has a contribution to make

toward a better world.

Marx may have failed as a social visionary, but he had capitalism figured

out. It is based not on productivity or social benefit, but on the pursuit

of capital growth through exploiting everything in its path. The job of

elite planners is to create new spaces for capital to grow in. Competitive

imperialism provided growth for centuries; collective imperialism was

invented when still more growth was needed; and then neoliberalism took

over. Like a cancer, capitalism consumes its host and is never satisfied.

The capital pool must always grow, more and more, forever – until the

host dies or capitalism is replaced.

The matrix equates capitalism with free enterprise, and defines

centralised-state-planning socialism as the only alternative to capitalism.

In reality, capitalism didn’t amount to much of a force until the

Enlightenment and Industrial Revolution of the late 1700s – and we

certainly cannot characterise all prior societies as socialist. Free

enterprise, private property, commerce, banking, international trade,

economic specialisation – all of these had existed for millennia before

capitalism. Capitalism claims credit for modern prosperity, but credit

would be better given to developments in science and technology.

Before capitalism, Western nations were generally run by aristocratic

classes. The aristocratic attitude toward wealth focused on management and

maintenance. With capitalism, the focus is always on growth and

development; whatever one has is but the seeds to build a still greater

fortune. In fact, there are infinite alternatives to capitalism, and

different societies can choose different systems, once they are free to do

so. As Morpheus put it: “Outside the matrix everything is possible, and

there are no limits.”

The matrix defines “democracy” as competitive party politics, because

that is a game wealthy elites have long since learned to corrupt and

manipulate. Even in the days of the Roman Republic the techniques were well

understood. Real-world democracy is possible only if the people themselves

participate in setting society’s direction. An elected official can only

truly represent a constituency after that constituency has worked out its

positions – from the local to the global – on the issues of the day.

For that to happen, the interests of different societal factions must be

harmonised through interaction and discussion. Collaboration, not

competition, is what leads to effective harmonisation.

In order for the movement to end elite rule and establish livable societies

to succeed, it will need to evolve a democratic process, and to use that

process to develop a program of consensus reform that harmonises the

interests of its constituencies. In order to be politically victorious, it

will need to reach out to all segments of society and become a majority

movement. By such means, the democratic process of the movement can become

the democratic process of a newly empowered civil society. There is no

adequate theory of democracy at present, although there is much to be

learned from history and from theory. The movement will need to develop a

democratic process as it goes along, and that objective must be pursued as

diligently as victory itself. Otherwise some new tyranny will eventually

replace the old.

It ain’t left or right. It’s up and down.

Here we all are down here struggling while

the Corporate Elite are all up there having a nice day!

— Carolyn Chute, author of The Beans of Egypt Maine and

anti-corporate activist

Footnotes

1. Primarily Western Europe, later joined by the United States.

2. See “KGB-ing America”, Tony Serra, Whole Earth, Winter, 1998.

Recommended Reading

Michel Chossudovsky, The Globalization Of Poverty - Impacts of IMF and

World Bank Reforms, The Third World Network, Penang, Malaysia, 1997.

This detailed study by an economics insider shows the consequences of

“reforms” in various parts of the world, revealing a clear pattern of

callous neo-colonialism and genocide. Definitely red-pill material.

Jerry Mander and Goldsmith, eds., The Case Against the Global

Economy and for a Turn Toward The Local, Sierra Club Books, San Francisco,

1996.

This fine collection of forty-three chapters by knowledgeable

contributors analyses the broad structure of globalisation, and explores

locally based and sustainable economic alternatives. An excellent

introduction, textbook, and reference work.

Douthwaite, The Growth Illusion, Lilliput Press, Dublin, 1992.

A fascinating and wide-ranging look at growth and capitalism, their

historical roots and their consequences. Offers a healthy dose of common

sense, and a vision of stability and sustainability.

Frances Lapp?, ph , Rosset, World Hunger, Twelve

Myths, Grove Press, New York, 1986.

Another red pill. Debunks Malthusian thinking, among other things.

Here’s a sample: “During the past twenty-five years food production has

outstripped population growth by 16 Percent. India – which for many of us

symbolizes over-population and poverty – is one of the top third-world

food exporters. If a mere 5.6 percent of India’s food production were

re-allocated, hunger would be wiped out in India.”

Hans- & Harald Schumann, The Global Trap, Globalization & the

Assault on Democracy & Prosperity, St. ’s Press, New York, 1997.

A best-selling European perspective on globalisation. Recommended for

American audiences in order to understand more about the European context.

Greider, One World Ready or Not, the Manic Logic of Global

Capitalism, Simon & Schuster, New York, 1997.

A tour by a superb journalist showing how the global economy operates

in various parts of the world. Not much emphasis on political issues or

economic alternatives.

Goldsmith, The Response, Macmillan, London, 1995.

A critique of neoliberal thinking presented as a debate with those who

criticised the author’s previous book, The Trap. It may be pointless for

the author to attempt logical debate with matrix apologists, but the book

is informative for readers.

Third World Resurgence, a magazine published monthly by the Third World

Network, Penang, Malaysia, http://www.twnside.org.sg.

This magazine deserves widespread circulation. It covers a wide range

of global issues, presents a strong and sensible third-world perspective,

and is a very good source of real-world news. Kohr is managing

editor and a frequent contributor.

The New Internationalist, a magazine published monthly by New

Internationalist Publications, Ltd, Oxford, UK, http://www.newint.org.

Another good source of real news and commentary, with a global

perspective.

Holly Sklar ed., Trilateralism - the Trilateral Commission and Elite

Planning for World Management, South End Press, Boston, 1980.

This well-researched anthology explains the role in global planning

played by such elite organisations as the Trilateral Commission, the

Council on Foreign Relations, and the Bilderbergers. Examples from various

parts of the world are used to show what kinds of considerations go into

the formation of on-the-ground policies.

Parenti, The Sword and the Dollar, Imperialism, Revolution, and the

Arms Race, St. ’s Press, New York, 1989.

One of many red-pill books by a prolific and well-informed author. Here

he talks about the reality of imperialism and the matrix of Cold War

rhetoric. For an insightful examination of how matrix reality is

fabricated, see also his Make-Believe Media, and Inventing Reality, also

from St. ’s.

Zinn, A People’s History of the United States, Harper, New

York, 1989.

A superlative and well-researched treatment of American history from

1942 to the present. The material on grass-roots social movements provides

valuable lessons for present-day movement organisers.

Blum, Killing Hope, U.S. Military and CIA Interventions since World

War II, Common Courage Press, Monroe Maine, 1995.

A comprehensive review of how the US government manages world affairs

by force and intrigue when persuasion and economic pressure fail to do the

job. A red-pill antidote for anyone who feels tempted to trust the

“international community” to pursue “humanitarian interventionism.”

Covert Action Quarterly magazine, published quarterly by Covert Action

Publications, Inc., Washington D.C. 1994, http://www.covertaction.org.

Keeps you up-to-date on covert activities, cover-ups, military affairs,

and current trouble spots. Contributors include many ex-intelligence

officers who saw the error of their ways.

Greider, Who Will Tell the People, the Betrayal of American

Democracy, Touchstone - Simon & Schuster, New York, 1993.

This best seller shows in detail how the American democratic process is

subverted at every stage by corporate interests. Greider was a highly

respected journalist for many years at the Washington Post and his

high-level contacts permit him to present an insider’s view of how the

influence-peddling system actually operates. A chilling eye-opener.

P. Huntington, The Clash Of Civilizations and the Remaking of World

Order, Simon and Schuster, London, 1997.

Another classic by one of the foremost spinners of matrix illusion. In

the guise of historical analysis, Huntington fabricates a worldview

designed to justify Western domination under globalisation. According to

The Economist, Huntington’s civilisation-clash paradigm has already

become the “sea” in which Washington policy makers swim. The book

reveals the backbone structure of modern matrix reality, putting day-to-day

official rhetoric into an understandable framework. And it clearly reveals

the real intentions of elite planners regarding the tactics of global

management through selective interventionism.

Foreign Affairs, a journal published quarterly by the Council on Foreign

Relations, New York.

The best source I’ve found to track the latest shifts in the matrix

and to glean an understanding of current elite thinking. Some reading

between the lines is called for, as the journal frames its analysis in

terms of US national interests, failing to make the obvious links between

geopolitical and economic regimes.

Elite planning for postwar neo-imperialism...

Recommendation P-B23 (July, 1941) stated that worldwide financial

institutions were necessary for the purpose of “stabilizing currencies

and facilitating programs of capital investment for constructive

undertakings in backward and underdeveloped regions.” During the last

half of 1941 and in the first months of 1942, the Council developed this

idea for the integration of the world.... Isaiah Bowman first suggested a

way to solve the problem of maintaining effective control over weaker

territories while avoiding overt imperial conquest. At a Council meeting in

May 1942, he stated that the United States had to exercise the strength

needed to assure “security,” and at the same time “avoid conventional

forms of imperialism.” The way to do this, he argued, was to make the

exercise of that power international in character through a United Nations

body.

— ce Shoup & Minter, in Holly Sklar’s Trilateralism

(see recommended reading), writing about strategic recommendations

developed during World War II by the Council on Foreign Relations.

___________________________________________________________

Copyright 2000 K. . The above article first appeared in Whole

Earth Magazine (#101), Summer 2000, http://www.wholeearthmag.com.

, an expatriate from Silicon Valley, currently lives and writes in

Wexford, Ireland. He runs the Cyberjournal " list " on the Internet. Email:

richard@..., http://cyberjournal.org. Address: PO Box 26,

Wexford, Ireland.

Also here

http://www.newdawnmagazine.com/Articles/Escaping%20the%20Matrix.html

--------------------------------------------------------

Sheri Nakken, R.N., MA, Classical Homeopath

http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/vaccine.htm

[Guest guest]

> Please, I can't stress this

> enough - READ THIS.

> You will see that all politicians

> are the same in manipulating us

SHERI:

I read it the first time you posted

the link to it. Characterizing

ALL politicians as " manipulative

politicians " is probably not far

from the truth.

> PLEASE READ and when you have

> tell this list that you have and

> what you think

This essay describes a fairly classic radical ultra-liberal socio-

policital perspective; quite well documented historically; with a

literary weaving into the schema of " The Matrix " metaphor [...a

successful tool I might add...], which proves appealing to many

modern readers.

Critical conservative readers wouldn't find much to disagree with in

the nutshell factual description above. Reactions to the content,

however, will diverge rapidly.

As a left-leaner, mine was predictable and in essential agreement.

I showed it to a PhD Chemist I know, whose political affiliation is

conservative republican, and his response was, " ...garden variety

liberal bullshit... "

I guess what I'm saying, Sheri, is..., I thank you for providing the

article...,

but it ain't gonna sway the " neoliberal " faithful. :-)

Tim

[Guest guest]

I read it and yes its scary stuff but I agree not really surprising,

a couple of paragraphs which stood out to me were:

the United States was governed by anyone during the

> decades after World War II, it was governed by

the President acting with

> the support and cooperation of key individuals and groups in the

executive

> office, the federal bureaucracy, Congress, and the more important

> businesses, banks, law firms, foundations, and media, which

constitute the

> private sector's `Establishment'.

Key words being ACTING WITH THE SUPPORT AND COOPERATION OF add to

this list pharmaceutical companies " et viola " you have your

connection...

Before capitalism, Western nations were generally run by aristocratic

> classes. The aristocratic attitude toward wealth focused on

management and

> maintenance. With capitalism, the focus is always on growth and

> development;

Key words being MANAGEMENT AND MAINTENANCE VS GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT

Anyway, it is worth a read for anyone who hasn't yet!

Deb

> Please, I can't stress this enough - READ THIS.

> You will see that all politicians are the same in manipulating us

>

> PLEASE READ and when you have tell this list that you have and

what you think

> Sheri

>

>

> I encourage you to print this out and really read it.

>

> http://cyberjournal.org/cj/rkm/WE/jun00Matrix.shtml

>

> summer 2000

>

> Escaping the Matrix By RICHARD K. MOORE

>

>

> The defining dramatic moment in the film The Matrix occurs just

after

> Morpheus invites Neo to choose between a red pill and a blue pill.

The red

> pill promises " the truth, nothing more. " Neo takes the red pill and

> awakes to reality – something utterly different from anything Neo,

or the

> audience, could have expected. What Neo had assumed to be reality

turned

> out to be only a collective illusion, fabricated by the Matrix and

fed to a

> population that is asleep, cocooned in grotesque embryonic pods. In

> Plato's famous parable about the shadows on the walls of the cave,

true

> reality is at least reflected in perceived reality. In the Matrix

world,

> true reality and perceived reality exist on entirely different

planes.

>

> The story is intended as metaphor, and the parallels that drew my

attention

> had to do with political reality. This article offers a particular

> perspective on what's going on in the world – and how things got

to be

> that way – in this era of globalisation. From that red-pill

perspective,

> everyday media-consensus reality – like the Matrix in the film – is

> seen to be a fabricated collective illusion. Like Neo, I didn't

know what

> I was looking for when my investigation began, but I knew that

what I was

> being told didn't make sense. I read scores of histories and

biographies,

> observing connections between them, and began to develop my own

theories

> about roots of various historical events. I found myself largely in

> agreement with writers like Noam Chomsky and Parenti, but

I also

> perceived important patterns that others seem to have missed.

>

> When I started tracing historical forces, and began to interpret

> present-day events from a historical perspective, I could see the

same old

> dynamics at work and found a meaning in unfolding events far

different from

> what official pronouncements proclaimed. Such pronouncements are,

after

> all, public relations fare, given out by politicians who want to

look good

> to the voters. Most of us expect rhetoric from politicians, and

take what

> they say with a grain of salt. But as my own picture of present

reality

> came into focus, " grain of salt " no longer worked as a metaphor. I

> began to see that consensus reality – as generated by official

rhetoric

> and amplified by mass media – bears very little relationship to

actual

> reality. " The matrix " was a metaphor I was ready for.

>

> In consensus reality (the blue-pill perspective) " left " and " right "

> are the two ends of the political spectrum. Politics is a tug-of-

war

> between competing factions, carried out by political parties and

elected

> representatives. Society gets pulled this way and that within the

political

> spectrum, reflecting the interests of whichever party won the last

> election. The left and right are therefore political enemies. Each

side is

> convinced that it knows how to make society better; each believes

the other

> enjoys undue influence; and each blames the other for the political

> stalemate that apparently prevents society from dealing

effectively with

> its problems.

>

> This perspective on the political process, and on the roles of

left and

> right, is very far from reality. It is a fabricated collective

illusion.

> Morpheus tells Neo that the Matrix is " the world that was pulled

over

> your eyes to hide you from the truth.... As long as the Matrix

exists,

> humanity cannot be free. " Consensus political reality is precisely

such a

> matrix. Later we will take a fresh look at the role of left and

right, and

> at national politics. But first we must develop our red-pill

historical

> perspective. I've had to condense the arguments to bare essentials;

> please see the annotated sources at the end for more thorough

treatments of

> particular topics.

>

> Imperialism and the Matrix

>

> >From the time of Columbus to 1945, world affairs were largely

dominated by

> competition among Western nations seeking to stake out spheres of

> influence, control sea lanes, and exploit colonial empires. Each

Western

> power became the core of an imperialist economy whose periphery

was managed

> for the benefit of the core nation. Military might determined the

scope of

> an empire; wars were initiated when a core nation felt it had

sufficient

> power to expand its periphery at the expense of a competitor.

Economies and

> societies in the periphery were kept backward – to keep their

populations

> under control, to provide cheap labour, and to guarantee markets

for goods

> manufactured in the core. Imperialism robbed the periphery not

only of

> wealth but also of its ability to develop its own societies,

cultures, and

> economies in a natural way for local benefit.

>

> The driving force behind Western imperialism has always been the

pursuit of

> economic gain, ever since Isabella commissioned Columbus on his

first

> entrepreneurial voyage. The rhetoric of empire concerning wars,

however,

> has typically been about other things – the White Man's Burden,

> bringing true religion to the heathens, Manifest Destiny,

defeating the

> Yellow Peril or the Hun, seeking lebensraum, or making the world

safe for

> democracy. Any fabricated motivation for war or empire would do,

as long as

> it appealed to the collective consciousness of the population at

the time.

> The propaganda lies of yesterday were recorded and became

consensus history

> – the fabric of the matrix.

>

> While the costs of territorial empire (fleets, colonial

administrations,

> etc.) were borne by Western taxpayers generally, the profits of

imperialism

> were enjoyed primarily by private corporations and investors.

Government

> and corporate elites were partners in the business of imperialism:

empires

> gave government leaders power and prestige, and gave corporate

leaders

> power and wealth. Corporations ran the real business of empire

while

> government leaders fabricated noble excuses for the wars that were

required

> to keep that business going. Matrix reality was about patriotism,

national

> honour, and heroic causes; true reality was on another plane

altogether:

> that of economics.

>

> Industrialisation, beginning in the late 1700s, created a demand

for new

> markets and increased raw materials; both demands spurred

accelerated

> expansion of empire. Wealthy investors amassed fortunes by setting

up

> large-scale industrial and trading operations, leading to the

emergence of

> an influential capitalist elite. Like any other elite, capitalists

used

> their wealth and influence to further their own interests however

they

> could. And the interests of capitalism always come down to

economic growth;

> investors must reap more than they sow or the whole system comes

to a

> grinding halt.

>

> Thus capitalism, industrialisation, nationalism, warfare,

imperialism –

> and the matrix – coevolved. Industrialised weapon production

provided the

> muscle of modern warfare, and capitalism provided the appetite to

use that

> muscle. Government leaders pursued the policies necessary to

expand empire

> while creating a rhetorical matrix, around nationalism, to justify

those

> policies. Capitalist growth depended on empire, which in turn

depended on a

> strong and stable core nation to defend it. National interests and

> capitalist interests were inextricably linked – or so it seemed

for more

> than two centuries.

>

> World War II and Pax Americana

>

> 1945 will be remembered as the year World War II ended and the

bond of the

> atomic nucleus was broken. But 1945 also marked another momentous

fission

> – breaking of the bond between national and capitalist interests.

After

> every previous war, and in many cases after severe devastation,

European

> nations had always picked themselves back up and resumed their

competition

> over empire. But after World War II, a Pax Americana was

established. The

> US began to manage all the Western peripheries on behalf of

capitalism

> generally, while preventing the communist powers from interfering

in the

> game. Capitalist powers no longer needed to fight over investment

realms,

> and competitive imperialism was replaced by collective imperialism

(see

> sidebar). Opportunities for capital growth were no longer linked

to the

> military power of nations, apart from the power of America. In his

Killing

> Hope, U.S. Military and CIA Interventions since World War II (see

> recommended reading), Blum chronicles hundreds of

significant

> covert and overt interventions, showing exactly how the US carried

out its

> imperial management role.

>

> In the postwar years matrix reality diverged ever further from

actual

> reality. In the postwar matrix world, imperialism had been

abandoned and

> the world was being " democratised " ; in the real world, imperialism

had

> become better organised and more efficient. In the matrix world

the US

> " restored order, " or " came to the assistance " of nations which were

> being " undermined by Soviet influence " ; in the real world, the

> periphery was being systematically suppressed and exploited. In

the matrix

> world, the benefit was going to the periphery in the form of

countless aid

> programs; in the real world, immense wealth was being extracted

from the

> periphery.

>

> Growing glitches in the matrix weren't noticed by most people in

the

> West, because the postwar years brought unprecedented levels of

Western

> prosperity and social progress. The rhetoric claimed progress

would come to

> all, and Westerners could see it being realised in their own towns

and

> cities. The West became the collective core of a global empire, and

> exploitative development led to prosperity for Western

populations, while

> generating immense riches for corporations, banks, and wealthy

capital

> investors.

>

> Glitches in the Matrix, Popular Rebellion, and Neoliberalism

>

> The parallel agenda of Third-World exploitation and Western

prosperity

> worked effectively for the first two postwar decades. But in the

1960s

> large numbers of Westerners, particularly the young and well

educated,

> began to notice glitches in the matrix. In Vietnam imperialism was

too

> naked to be successfully masked as something else. A major split in

> American public consciousness occurred, as millions of anti-war

protesters

> and civil-rights activists punctured the fabricated consensus of

the 1950s

> and declared the reality of exploitation and suppression both at

home and

> abroad. The environmental movement arose, challenging even the

exploitation

> of the natural world. In Europe, 1968 joined 1848 as a landmark

year of

> popular protest.

>

> These developments disturbed elite planners. The postwar regime's

> stability was being challenged from within the core – and the

formula of

> Western prosperity no longer guaranteed public passivity. A report

> published in 1975, the Report of the Trilateral Task Force on

Governability

> of Democracies, provides a glimpse into the thinking of elite

circles. Alan

> Wolfe discusses this report in Holly Sklar's eye-opening

Trilateralism

> (see recommended reading). Wolfe focuses especially on the

analysis Harvard

> professor P. Huntington presented in a section of the report

> entitled " The Crisis of Democracy. " Huntington is an articulate

> promoter of elite policy shifts, and contributes pivotal articles

to

> publications such as the Council on Foreign Relations's Foreign

Affairs

> (see recommended reading).

>

> Huntington tells us that democratic societies " cannot work " unless

the

> citizenry is " passive. " The " democratic surge of the 1960s "

> represented an " excess of democracy, " which must be reduced if

> governments are to carry out their traditional domestic and foreign

> policies. Huntington's notion of " traditional policies " is

expressed

> in a passage from the report:

>

> To the extent that the United States was governed by anyone

during the

> decades after World War II, it was governed by the President

acting with

> the support and cooperation of key individuals and groups in the

executive

> office, the federal bureaucracy, Congress, and the more important

> businesses, banks, law firms, foundations, and media, which

constitute the

> private sector's `Establishment'.

>

> In these few words Huntington spells out the reality that electoral

> democracy has little to do with how America is run, and summarises

the kind

> of people who are included within the elite planning community.

Who needs

> conspiracy theories when elite machinations are clearly described

in public

> documents like these?

>

> Besides failing to deliver popular passivity, the policy of

prosperity for

> Western populations had another downside, having to do with Japan's

> economic success. Under the Pax Americana umbrella, Japan had been

able to

> industrialise and become an imperial player – the prohibition on

Japanese

> rearmament had become irrelevant. With Japan's then-lower living

> standards, Japanese producers could undercut prevailing prices and

steal

> market share from Western producers. Western capital needed to

find a way

> to become more competitive on world markets, and Western

prosperity was

> standing in the way. Elite strategists, as Huntington showed, were

fully

> capable of understanding these considerations, and the

requirements of

> corporate growth created a strong motivation to make the needed

adjustments

> – in both reality and rhetoric.

>

> If popular prosperity could be sacrificed, there were many obvious

ways

> Western capital could be made more competitive. Production could

be moved

> overseas to low-wage areas, allowing domestic unemployment to

rise. Unions

> could be attacked and wages forced down, and people could be

pushed into

> temporary and part-time jobs without benefits. Regulations

governing

> corporate behaviour could be removed, corporate and capital-gains

taxes

> could be reduced, and the revenue losses could be taken out of

> public-service budgets. Public infrastructures could be

privatised, the

> services reduced to cut costs, and then they could be milked for

easy

> profits while they deteriorated from neglect.

>

> These are the very policies and programs launched during the

> Reagan-Thatcher years in the US and Britain. They represent a

systematic

> project of increasing corporate growth at the expense of popular

prosperity

> and welfare. Such a real agenda would have been unpopular, and a

> corresponding matrix reality was fabricated for public

consumption. The

> matrix reality used real terms like " deregulation, " " reduced

> taxes, " and " privatisation, " but around them was woven an economic

> mythology. The old, failed laissez-faire doctrine of the 1800s was

> reintroduced with the help of Milton Friedman's Chicago School of

> economics, and " less government " became the proud " modern " theme in

> America and Britain. Sensible regulations had restored financial

stability

> after the Great Depression, and had broken up anti-competitive

monopolies

> such as the Rockefeller trust and AT & T. But in the new matrix

reality, all

> regulations were considered bureaucratic interference. Reagan and

Thatcher

> preached the virtues of individualism, and promised to " get

government

> off people's backs. " The implication was that everyday individuals

were

> to get more money and freedom, but in reality the primary benefits

would go

> to corporations and wealthy investors.

>

> The academic term for laissez-faire economics is " economic

liberalism, "

> and hence the Reagan-Thatcher revolution has come to be known as

the

> " neoliberal revolution. " It brought a radical change in actual

reality

> by returning to the economic philosophy that led to sweatshops,

corruption,

> and robber-baron monopolies in the nineteenth century. It brought

an

> equally radical change in matrix reality – a complete reversal in

the

> attitude that was projected regarding government. Government

policies had

> always been criticised in the media, but the institution of

government had

> always been respected – reflecting the traditional bond between

> capitalism and nationalism. With Reagan, we had a sitting

president telling

> us that government itself was a bad thing. Many of us may have

agreed with

> him, but such a sentiment had never before found official favour.

Soon,

> British and American populations were beginning to applaud the

destruction

> of the very democratic institutions that provided their only hope

of

> participation in the political process.

>

> Globalisation and World Government

>

> The essential bond between capitalism and nationalism was broken

in 1945,

> but it took some time for elite planners to recognise this new

condition

> and to begin bringing the world system into alignment with it. The

strong

> Western nation state had been the bulwark of capitalism for

centuries, and

> initial postwar policies were based on the assumption that this

would

> continue indefinitely. The Bretton Woods financial system (the

IMF, World

> Bank, and a system of fixed exchange rates among major currencies)

was set

> up to stabilise national economies, and popular prosperity was

encouraged

> to provide political stability. Neoliberalism in the US and Britain

> represented the first serious break with this policy framework –

and

> brought the first visible signs of the fission of the nation-

capital bond.

>

> The neoliberal project was economically profitable in the US and

Britain,

> and the public accepted the matrix economic mythology. Meanwhile,

the

> integrated global economy gave rise to a new generation of

transnational

> corporations, and corporate leaders began to realise that

corporate growth

> was not dependent on strong core nation-states. Indeed, Western

nations –

> with their environmental laws, consumer-protection measures, and

other

> forms of regulatory " interference " – were a burden on corporate

> growth. Having been successfully field tested in the two oldest

> " democracies, " the neoliberal project moved onto the global stage.

The

> Bretton Woods system of fixed rates of currency exchange was

weakened, and

> the international financial system became destabilising, instead of

> stabilising, for national economies. The radical free-trade

project was

> launched, leading eventually to the World Trade Organisation. The

fission

> that had begun in 1945 was finally manifesting as an explosive

change in

> the world system.

>

> The objective of neoliberal free-trade treaties is to remove all

political

> controls over domestic and international trade and commerce.

Corporations

> have free rein to maximise profits, heedless of environmental

consequences

> and safety risks. Instead of governments regulating corporations,

the WTO

> now sets rules for governments, telling them what kind of beef

they must

> import, whether or not they can ban asbestos, and what additives

they must

> permit in petroleum products. So far, in every case where the WTO

has been

> asked to review a health, safety, or environmental regulation, the

> regulation has been overturned.

>

> Most of the world has been turned into a periphery; the imperial

core has

> been boiled down to the capitalist elite themselves, represented

by their

> bureaucratic, unrepresentative, WTO world government. The burden of

> accelerated imperialism falls hardest outside the West, where

loans are

> used as a lever by the IMF to compel debtor nations such as Rwanda

and

> South Korea to accept suicidal " reform " packages. In the 1800s,

> genocide was employed to clear North America and Australia of

their native

> populations, creating room for growth. Today, a similar program of

genocide

> has apparently been unleashed against sub-Saharan Africa. The IMF

destroys

> the economies, the CIA trains militias and stirs up tribal

conflicts, and

> the West sells weapons to all sides. Famine and genocidal civil

wars are

> the predictable and inevitable result. Meanwhile, AIDS runs

rampant while

> the WTO and the US government use trade laws to prevent medicines

from

> reaching the victims.

>

> As in the past, Western military force will be required to control

the

> non-Western periphery and make adjustments to local political

arrangements

> when considered necessary by elite planners. The Pentagon

continues to

> provide the primary policing power, with NATO playing an ever-

increasing

> role. Resentment against the West and against neoliberalism is

growing in

> the Third World, and the frequency of military interventions is

bound to

> increase. All of this needs to be made acceptable to Western

minds, adding

> a new dimension to the matrix.

>

> In the latest matrix reality, the West is called the " international

> community, " whose goal is to serve " humanitarian " causes. Bill

> Clinton made it explicit with his " Clinton Doctrine, " in which (as

> quoted in the Washington Post) he solemnly promised, " If somebody

comes

> after innocent civilians and tries to kill them en masse because

of their

> race, their ethnic background or their religion and it is within

our power

> stop it, we will stop it. " This matrix fabrication is very

effective

> indeed; who opposes prevention of genocide? Only outside the

matrix does

> one see that genocide is caused by the West in the first place,

that the

> worst cases of genocide are continuing, that " assistance " usually

makes

> things worse (as in the Balkans), and that Clinton's handy doctrine

> enables him to intervene when and where he chooses. Since

dictators and the

> stirring of ethnic rivalries are standard tools used in managing

the

> periphery, a US president can always find " innocent civilians "

wherever

> elite plans call for an intervention.

>

> In matrix reality, globalisation is not a project but rather the

inevitable

> result of beneficial market forces. Genocide in Africa is no fault

of the

> West, but is due to ancient tribal rivalries. Every measure

demanded by

> globalisation is referred to as " reform, " (the word is never used

with

> irony). " Democracy " and " reform " are frequently used together,

> always leaving the subtle impression that one has something to do

with the

> other. The illusion is presented that all economic boats are

rising, and if

> yours isn't, it must be your own fault: you aren't " competitive "

> enough. Economic failures are explained away as " temporary

> adjustments, " or else the victim (as in South Korea or Russia) is

blamed

> for not being sufficiently neoliberal. " Investor confidence " is

> referred to with the same awe and reverence that earlier societies

might

> have expressed toward the " will of the gods. "

>

> Western quality of life continues to decline, while the WTO

establishes

> legal precedents ensuring that its authority will not be

challenged when

> its decisions become more draconian. Things will get much worse in

the

> West; this was anticipated in elite circles when the neoliberal

project was

> still on the drawing board, as is illustrated in

Huntington's

> " The Crisis of Democracy " report discussed earlier.

>

> Management of Discontented Societies

>

> The postwar years, especially in the United States, were

characterised by

> consensus politics. Most people shared a common understanding of

how

> society worked, and generally approved of how things were going.

Prosperity

> was real and the matrix version of reality was reassuring. Most

people

> believed in it. Those beliefs became a shared consensus, and the

government

> could then carry out its plans as it intended, " responding " to the

> programmed public will.

>

> The " excess democracy " of the 1960s and 1970s attacked this shared

> consensus from below, and neoliberal planners decided from above

that

> ongoing consensus wasn't worth paying for. They accepted that

segments of

> society would persist in disbelieving various parts of the matrix.

Activism

> and protest were to be expected. New means of social control would

be

> needed to deal with activist movements and with growing

discontent, as

> neoliberalism gradually tightened the economic screws. Such means

of

> control were identified and have since been largely implemented,

> particularly in the United States. In many ways America sets the

pace of

> globalisation; innovations can often be observed there before they

occur

> elsewhere. This is particularly true in the case of social-control

> techniques.

>

> The most obvious means of social control, in a discontented

society, is a

> strong, semi-militarised police force. Most of the periphery has

been

> managed by such means for centuries. This was obvious to elite

planners in

> the West, was adopted as policy, and has now been largely

implemented.

> Urban and suburban ghettos – where the adverse consequences of

> neoliberalism are currently most concentrated – have literally

become

> occupied territories, where police beatings and unjustified

shootings are

> commonplace.

>

> So that the beefed-up police force could maintain control in

conditions of

> mass unrest, elite planners also realised that much of the US Bill

of

> Rights would need to be neutralised. (This is not surprising,

given that

> the Bill's authors had just lived through a revolution and were

seeking

> to ensure that future generations would have the means to organise

and

> overthrow any oppressive future government.) The rights-

neutralisation

> project has been largely implemented, as exemplified by armed

midnight

> raids, outrageous search-and-seizure practices, overly broad

conspiracy

> laws, wholesale invasion of privacy, massive incarceration, and

the rise of

> prison slave labour. The Rubicon has been crossed – the techniques

of

> oppression long common in the empire's periphery are being

imported to

> the core.

>

> In the matrix, the genre of the TV or movie police drama has

served to

> create a reality in which " rights " are a joke, the accused are

> despicable sociopaths, and no criminal is ever brought to justice

until

> some noble cop or prosecutor bends the rules a bit. Government

officials

> bolster the construct by declaring " wars " on crime and drugs; the

noble

> cops are fighting a war out there in the streets – and you can't

win a

> war without using your enemy's dirty tricks. The CIA plays its

role by

> managing the international drug trade and making sure that ghetto

drug

> dealers are well supplied. In this way, the American public has

been led to

> accept the means of its own suppression.

>

> The mechanisms of the police state are in place. They will be used

when

> necessary – as we see in ghettos and skyrocketing prison

populations, as

> we saw on the streets of Seattle and Washington D.C. during recent

anti-WTO

> demonstrations, and as is suggested by executive orders that

enable the

> president to suspend the Constitution and declare martial law

whenever he

> deems it necessary. But raw force is only the last line of defense

for the

> elite regime. Neoliberal planners introduced more subtle defences

into the

> matrix; looking at these will bring us back to our discussion of

the left

> and right.

>

> Divide and rule is one of the oldest means of mass control –

standard

> practice since at least the Roman Empire. This is applied at the

level of

> modern imperialism, where each small nation competes with other

for capital

> investments. Within societies it works this way: If each social

group can

> be convinced that some other group is the source of its

discontent, then

> the population's energy will be spent on inter-group struggles. The

> regime can sit on the sidelines, intervening covertly to stir

things up or

> to guide them in desired directions. In this way most discontent

can be

> neutralised, and force can be reserved for exceptional cases. In

the

> prosperous postwar years, consensus politics served to manage the

> population. Under neoliberalism, programmed factionalism has

become the

> front-line defense – the matrix version of divide and rule.

>

> The covert guiding of various social movements has proven to be

one of the

> most effective means of programming factions and stirring them

against one

> another. Fundamentalist religious movements have been particularly

useful.

> They have been used not only within the US, but also to maximise

> divisiveness in the Middle East and for other purposes throughout

the

> empire. The collective energy and dedication of " true believers "

makes

> them a potent political weapon that movement leaders can readily

aim where

> needed. In the US that weapon has been used to promote censorship

on the

> Internet, to attack the women's movement, to support repressive

> legislation, and generally to bolster the ranks of what is called

in the

> matrix the " right wing. "

>

> In the matrix, the various factions believe that their competition

with

> each other is the process that determines society's political

agenda.

> Politicians want votes, and hence the biggest and best-organised

factions

> should have the most influence, and their agendas should get the

most

> political attention. In reality there is only one significant

political

> agenda these days: the maximisation of capital growth through the

> dismantling of society, the continuing implementation of

neoliberalism, and

> the management of empire. Clinton's liberal rhetoric and his

playing

> around with health care and gay rights are not the result of

liberal

> pressure. They are rather the means by which Clinton is sold to

liberal

> voters, so that he can proceed with real business: getting NAFTA

through

> Congress, promoting the WTO, giving away the public airwaves,

justifying

> military interventions, and so forth. Issues of genuine importance

are

> never raised in campaign politics – this is a major glitch in the

matrix

> for those who have eyes to see it.

>

> Escaping the Matrix

>

> The matrix cannot fool all of the people all of the time. Under the

> onslaught of globalisation, the glitches are becoming ever more

difficult

> to conceal – as earlier, with the Vietnam War. Last November's

> anti-establishment demonstrations in Seattle, the largest in

decades, were

> aimed directly at globalisation and the WTO. Even more important,

Seattle

> saw the coming together of factions that the matrix had programmed

to fight

> one another, such as left-leaning environmentalists and socially

> conservative union members.

>

> Seattle represented the tip of an iceberg. A mass movement against

> globalisation and elite rule is ready to ignite, like a brush fire

on a

> dry, scorching day. The establishment has been expecting such a

movement

> and has a variety of defences at its command, including those used

> effectively against the movements of the 1960s and 1970s. In order

to

> prevail against what seem like overwhelming odds, the movement

must escape

> entirely from the matrix, and it must bring the rest of society

with it. As

> long as the matrix exists, humanity cannot be free. The whole

truth must be

> faced: Globalisation is centralised tyranny; capitalism has

outlasted its

> sell-by date; matrix " democracy " is elite rule; and " market forces "

> are imperialism. Left and right are enemies only in the matrix. In

reality

> we are all in this together, and each of us has a contribution to

make

> toward a better world.

>

> Marx may have failed as a social visionary, but he had capitalism

figured

> out. It is based not on productivity or social benefit, but on the

pursuit

> of capital growth through exploiting everything in its path. The

job of

> elite planners is to create new spaces for capital to grow in.

Competitive

> imperialism provided growth for centuries; collective imperialism

was

> invented when still more growth was needed; and then neoliberalism

took

> over. Like a cancer, capitalism consumes its host and is never

satisfied.

> The capital pool must always grow, more and more, forever – until

the

> host dies or capitalism is replaced.

>

> The matrix equates capitalism with free enterprise, and defines

> centralised-state-planning socialism as the only alternative to

capitalism.

> In reality, capitalism didn't amount to much of a force until the

> Enlightenment and Industrial Revolution of the late 1700s – and we

> certainly cannot characterise all prior societies as socialist.

Free

> enterprise, private property, commerce, banking, international

trade,

> economic specialisation – all of these had existed for millennia

before

> capitalism. Capitalism claims credit for modern prosperity, but

credit

> would be better given to developments in science and technology.

>

> Before capitalism, Western nations were generally run by

aristocratic

> classes. The aristocratic attitude toward wealth focused on

management and

> maintenance. With capitalism, the focus is always on growth and

> development; whatever one has is but the seeds to build a still

greater

> fortune. In fact, there are infinite alternatives to capitalism,

and

> different societies can choose different systems, once they are

free to do

> so. As Morpheus put it: " Outside the matrix everything is

possible, and

> there are no limits. "

>

> The matrix defines " democracy " as competitive party politics,

because

> that is a game wealthy elites have long since learned to corrupt

and

> manipulate. Even in the days of the Roman Republic the techniques

were well

> understood. Real-world democracy is possible only if the people

themselves

> participate in setting society's direction. An elected official

can only

> truly represent a constituency after that constituency has worked

out its

> positions – from the local to the global – on the issues of the

day.

> For that to happen, the interests of different societal factions

must be

> harmonised through interaction and discussion. Collaboration, not

> competition, is what leads to effective harmonisation.

>

> In order for the movement to end elite rule and establish livable

societies

> to succeed, it will need to evolve a democratic process, and to

use that

> process to develop a program of consensus reform that harmonises

the

> interests of its constituencies. In order to be politically

victorious, it

> will need to reach out to all segments of society and become a

majority

> movement. By such means, the democratic process of the movement

can become

> the democratic process of a newly empowered civil society. There

is no

> adequate theory of democracy at present, although there is much to

be

> learned from history and from theory. The movement will need to

develop a

> democratic process as it goes along, and that objective must be

pursued as

> diligently as victory itself. Otherwise some new tyranny will

eventually

> replace the old.

>

> It ain't left or right. It's up and down.

> Here we all are down here struggling while

> the Corporate Elite are all up there having a nice day!

> — Carolyn Chute, author of The Beans of Egypt Maine and

> anti-corporate activist

>

>

>

> Footnotes

>

> 1. Primarily Western Europe, later joined by the United States.

> 2. See " KGB-ing America " , Tony Serra, Whole Earth, Winter, 1998.

>

> Recommended Reading

>

> Michel Chossudovsky, The Globalization Of Poverty - Impacts of IMF

and

> World Bank Reforms, The Third World Network, Penang, Malaysia,

1997.

>

> This detailed study by an economics insider shows the

consequences of

> " reforms " in various parts of the world, revealing a clear pattern

of

> callous neo-colonialism and genocide. Definitely red-pill material.

>

> Jerry Mander and Goldsmith, eds., The Case Against the

Global

> Economy and for a Turn Toward The Local, Sierra Club Books, San

Francisco,

> 1996.

>

> This fine collection of forty-three chapters by knowledgeable

> contributors analyses the broad structure of globalisation, and

explores

> locally based and sustainable economic alternatives. An excellent

> introduction, textbook, and reference work.

>

> Douthwaite, The Growth Illusion, Lilliput Press, Dublin,

1992.

>

> A fascinating and wide-ranging look at growth and capitalism,

their

> historical roots and their consequences. Offers a healthy dose of

common

> sense, and a vision of stability and sustainability.

>

> Frances Lapp?, ph , Rosset, World Hunger,

Twelve

> Myths, Grove Press, New York, 1986.

>

> Another red pill. Debunks Malthusian thinking, among other

things.

> Here's a sample: " During the past twenty-five years food

production has

> outstripped population growth by 16 Percent. India – which for

many of us

> symbolizes over-population and poverty – is one of the top third-

world

> food exporters. If a mere 5.6 percent of India's food production

were

> re-allocated, hunger would be wiped out in India. "

>

> Hans- & Harald Schumann, The Global Trap,

Globalization & the

> Assault on Democracy & Prosperity, St. 's Press, New York,

1997.

>

> A best-selling European perspective on globalisation.

Recommended for

> American audiences in order to understand more about the European

context.

>

> Greider, One World Ready or Not, the Manic Logic of Global

> Capitalism, Simon & Schuster, New York, 1997.

>

> A tour by a superb journalist showing how the global economy

operates

> in various parts of the world. Not much emphasis on political

issues or

> economic alternatives.

>

> Goldsmith, The Response, Macmillan, London, 1995.

>

> A critique of neoliberal thinking presented as a debate with

those who

> criticised the author's previous book, The Trap. It may be

pointless for

> the author to attempt logical debate with matrix apologists, but

the book

> is informative for readers.

>

> Third World Resurgence, a magazine published monthly by the Third

World

> Network, Penang, Malaysia, http://www.twnside.org.sg.

>

> This magazine deserves widespread circulation. It covers a

wide range

> of global issues, presents a strong and sensible third-world

perspective,

> and is a very good source of real-world news. Kohr is

managing

> editor and a frequent contributor.

>

> The New Internationalist, a magazine published monthly by New

> Internationalist Publications, Ltd, Oxford, UK,

http://www.newint.org.

>

> Another good source of real news and commentary, with a global

> perspective.

>

> Holly Sklar ed., Trilateralism - the Trilateral Commission and

Elite

> Planning for World Management, South End Press, Boston, 1980.

>

> This well-researched anthology explains the role in global

planning

> played by such elite organisations as the Trilateral Commission,

the

> Council on Foreign Relations, and the Bilderbergers. Examples from

various

> parts of the world are used to show what kinds of considerations

go into

> the formation of on-the-ground policies.

>

> Parenti, The Sword and the Dollar, Imperialism,

Revolution, and the

> Arms Race, St. 's Press, New York, 1989.

>

> One of many red-pill books by a prolific and well-informed

author. Here

> he talks about the reality of imperialism and the matrix of Cold

War

> rhetoric. For an insightful examination of how matrix reality is

> fabricated, see also his Make-Believe Media, and Inventing

Reality, also

> from St. 's.

>

> Zinn, A People's History of the United States,

Harper, New

> York, 1989.

>

> A superlative and well-researched treatment of American

history from

> 1942 to the present. The material on grass-roots social movements

provides

> valuable lessons for present-day movement organisers.

>

> Blum, Killing Hope, U.S. Military and CIA Interventions

since World

> War II, Common Courage Press, Monroe Maine, 1995.

>

> A comprehensive review of how the US government manages world

affairs

> by force and intrigue when persuasion and economic pressure fail

to do the

> job. A red-pill antidote for anyone who feels tempted to trust the

> " international community " to pursue " humanitarian interventionism. "

>

> Covert Action Quarterly magazine, published quarterly by Covert

Action

> Publications, Inc., Washington D.C. 1994,

http://www.covertaction.org.

>

> Keeps you up-to-date on covert activities, cover-ups,

military affairs,

> and current trouble spots. Contributors include many ex-

intelligence

> officers who saw the error of their ways.

>

> Greider, Who Will Tell the People, the Betrayal of American

> Democracy, Touchstone - Simon & Schuster, New York, 1993.

>

> This best seller shows in detail how the American democratic

process is

> subverted at every stage by corporate interests. Greider was a

highly

> respected journalist for many years at the Washington Post and his

> high-level contacts permit him to present an insider's view of how

the

> influence-peddling system actually operates. A chilling eye-opener.

>

> P. Huntington, The Clash Of Civilizations and the Remaking

of World

> Order, Simon and Schuster, London, 1997.

>

> Another classic by one of the foremost spinners of matrix

illusion. In

> the guise of historical analysis, Huntington fabricates a worldview

> designed to justify Western domination under globalisation.

According to

> The Economist, Huntington's civilisation-clash paradigm has already

> become the " sea " in which Washington policy makers swim. The book

> reveals the backbone structure of modern matrix reality, putting

day-to-day

> official rhetoric into an understandable framework. And it clearly

reveals

> the real intentions of elite planners regarding the tactics of

global

> management through selective interventionism.

>

> Foreign Affairs, a journal published quarterly by the Council on

Foreign

> Relations, New York.

>

> The best source I've found to track the latest shifts in the

matrix

> and to glean an understanding of current elite thinking. Some

reading

> between the lines is called for, as the journal frames its

analysis in

> terms of US national interests, failing to make the obvious links

between

> geopolitical and economic regimes.

> Elite planning for postwar neo-imperialism...

>

> Recommendation P-B23 (July, 1941) stated that worldwide

financial

> institutions were necessary for the purpose of " stabilizing

currencies

> and facilitating programs of capital investment for constructive

> undertakings in backward and underdeveloped regions. " During the

last

> half of 1941 and in the first months of 1942, the Council

developed this

> idea for the integration of the world.... Isaiah Bowman first

suggested a

> way to solve the problem of maintaining effective control over

weaker

> territories while avoiding overt imperial conquest. At a Council

meeting in

> May 1942, he stated that the United States had to exercise the

strength

> needed to assure " security, " and at the same time " avoid

conventional

> forms of imperialism. " The way to do this, he argued, was to make

the

> exercise of that power international in character through a United

Nations

> body.

>

> — ce Shoup & Minter, in Holly Sklar's

Trilateralism

> (see recommended reading), writing about strategic recommendations

> developed during World War II by the Council on Foreign Relations.

>

> ___________________________________________________________

> Copyright 2000 K. . The above article first appeared

in Whole

> Earth Magazine (#101), Summer 2000, http://www.wholeearthmag.com.

> , an expatriate from Silicon Valley, currently lives and

writes in

> Wexford, Ireland. He runs the Cyberjournal " list " on the Internet.

Email:

> richard@c..., http://cyberjournal.org. Address: PO Box 26,

> Wexford, Ireland.

>

>

> Also here

> http://www.newdawnmagazine.com/Articles/Escaping%20the%

20Matrix.html

> --------------------------------------------------------

> Sheri Nakken, R.N., MA, Classical Homeopath

> http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/vaccine.htm