Resisting the Collective: But How?
by  Bobby Garner
20 January, 2006

"Like the effect of advertising upon the customer, the methods of political propaganda tend to increase the feeling of insignificance of the individual voter" - Erich Fromm, psychoanalyst and social philosopher, 1900-1980

The following reader comment prompted my response to a number of issues which do not necessarily appear to be related. But there is an intimate relationship involving our individuality and/or lack of it:

"Having your mail tapped without knowledge is one thing, but allowing it when you know about it is another step into the abyss."

So, what is the proper response to government encroachments into our private lives?

Since my days in the US Air Force, encryption technology has changed little. It mostly depends on software 'keys' that change frequently, sometimes within a message. For the receiving end to decipher the message it must know the key, otherwise they will just see garbage.

Now ask the pertinent question: "If my addressee can read my encrypted messages, how is that possible? Obviously they have the key but... Where did they get it? Well, it is sent along with every encrypted message. Now, if my intended addressee knows how to extract and read the key, what prevents the NSA from also getting it.

The bottom line is that the NSA and it's kindred agencies invented encryption technologies and are adept in the art of deciphering them on the fly in realtime. They have always been able to do this with varying degrees of efficiency with any encrypted message. A mature computer technology now enables them to conduct the activity on an unprecedented scale at far greater efficiency, otherwise nothing much has changed.

On a similar note, the recent administration requests for legalizing wiretaps on private phone and Internet lines, is only an attempt to legitimize an activity which is and has always been done at their discretion anyway. The only problem with making it legal is that it can then be used against us in court, whereas now it cannot (except under the Patriot Act of course which allows them to do far more than read your e-mail). In no case does it prevent or aid them in the ability to tap our private lines no matter how secure they may be.

On another point, computer operating system developers often ask for and receive an NSA review of their security measures. With friends like that, who needs enemies? We don't need to invent them, or contrive them in our "conspiracy theories". They come gift wrapped along with the communication technologies we use.

The message from the collective is: "We will assimilate you. Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated!", and we laughed because the words were spoken by a jester known collectively as "The Borg", because it had no other identity.

That's why they gave us democracy first. It's a key stepping stone on the road to collective socialism. The will of the people expressed through a bogus polling system and corrupt representation achieves collective complicity in the plan. For those believers in democracy and other assorted collectivist ideals, this is not seen as a problem, because, well, they are the complicit believers who have become complaisant (eager to please). For others who have not been thoroughly deceived and did not take refuge under the collective's protective wing, but retain their individuality, it is huge a problem. That explains why the individual is roundly scorned and publicly ridiculed if he sounds a discordant note, or looks "suspicious" in his neighbor's eye.

However, individual complicity is another matter, because the true individual is not represented by the collective. That's why the individual is so systematically attacked as a misfit, outsider, isolationist, separatist, loner, etc. and pronounced mentally ill which then justifies his being incapacitated, incarcerated, institutionalized, surrounded, isolated, traumatized, and frequently, summarily executed to prevent his 'disease' from contaminating the fictitious collective mind.

The individual was unceremoniously declared dead as duly noted by John D. Rockefeller. Ayn Rand led the last battle in our defense during the sixties counter-cultural revolution, and now the revolution goes on, but no one has stepped up to take her place. There are very few left who are not so intimidated that they dare express their individuality, and those who do so express themselves most effectively frequently loose their freedom of expression, by force if necessary, but more often through coercion. The world, as led by it's many forms of manmade government has alway been a dangerous place for individual liberty, but modern propaganda technologies render it extremely toxic. It's a continuing daily question of how much exposure one can tolerate.

Individual complicity is not granted except by the will of the individual. Therefore resistance is both possible and necessary. The question then is: How does one live 'in' the world without being 'of' the world? If that is the correct question, (and I believe it is), then the answer will also be the correct one which allows our co-existence with the collective and eventual survival apart from it. It's a very thin line that meanders through some rather bazaar territory that makes it virtually impossible to discuss openly, given all the prejudices, beliefs, loves, and hatreds within society. For that reason it really is an individual problem which only you and I can answer for ourselves as morally responsible individuals.

It truly is and must remain an individual issue. History reveals that every movement which demands or tolerates a leader of any title, reflects a microcosm of the collective. You cannot join the movement without becoming part of the collective. That remains true even if your movement is dedicated to opposing the collective. The collective sets out to destroy the individual. It cares nothing for the method used, because it's only the result that matters. Religions, governments, private institutions, social clubs, secret societies, and block parties all serve to separate the individual from his individualism along with his individual identity, and bring him willfully along into the collective.

The battle is between the Great God and Creator of the universe, and Satan the Devil with his hordes of accomplices disguised as "leaders". The "Lord Almighty" will have nothing to do with a collective formed against him in the manner such as that formed by Nimrod in ancient Babylon.

"Because of this, "come out from among them" "and be separated," says the Lord, "and do not touch the unclean thing," and I will receive you. "And I will be a Father to you, and you will be sons" and daughters to Me, says the Lord Almighty. - 2 Corinthians 6:17,18. also see Isa. 52:11, 2 Sam. 7:8, 14; Isa. 43:6.

One who holds the reigns of power is a tyrant regardless of the scope of his purview, or the magnitude of his benevolence. If he presumes to be a leader, his followers by their action admit complaisance and complicity in his deeds.

We are thus challenged to be individual "sons and daughters", not one homogeneous "mass of humanity" cowering at the feet of the strongest leader we can find.

"The state has, in order to control us, introduced division into our thinking, so that we come to distrust others and look to the state for protection! But the roots of our individualism remind us that what we are is inseparable from the source from which all others derive; that coercive practices that threaten our neighbor also threaten us." - Butler Shaffer

Contrary to the popular lie that it is our expressions of individualism that divides us, it is in fact the deconstruction of the individual's proper place within society which introduces the division by forming us into hyphenated groups which highlight our differences and keep them ever before us.

"We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission; which is the stage of the darkest periods of human history, the stage of rule by brute force." — Ayn Rand, from "The Nature of Government"

Bobby Garner is a researcher on the phenomenon of One-Worldism with an emphasis on the methods and techniques employed in it's attendant deception without which the New World Order cannot happen. He may be reached via E-mail from http://www.congregator.net/pages/contact.html. He welcomes your comments. Visit his website www.congregator.net This article may be posted in it's entirety on any website provided this statement remains attached.