The Individual Is Rising - A Book Excerpt

Cognitive Dissonance's picture

A Book Excerpt in Two Parts


The Individual Is Rising

By Joe Withrow



Part two of this book excerpt can be found exclusively at

To subscribe to ‘Dispatches’, a periodic newsletter from Cognitive Dissonance and TwoIceFloes Creations, please click here.



(Cognitive Dissonance – While I edited this book for Joe I am not participating in any revenue from the sale of this book. However I did purchase several copies for personal use as well as to give to family and friends.

In fact if you are looking for an inexpensive, easy to read explanation of what is going on in the world, where it is headed and ways to prepare for the inevitable change, all in a compact form you can hand to family and friends, this just might be the book for you.)



From Chapter Four - A New Paradigm is Forming


From the American perspective, one does not have to go back very far in history to recognize that the fundamental principles underlying our society have dramatically changed.  The American spirit was once firm on the principles of personal liberty, property rights, free markets, and non-intervention.  This is the spirit that attracted immigrants from all over the world to flock to American shores.  Freedom was quite popular. 

That spirit has been dulled over the past one hundred years and the principles underlying American society have shifted drastically.

Personal liberty was gradually traded for “the greater good for the greatest number” and the illusion of government provided security.  Property rights gradually became subject to all manner of governmental rules and regulations.  Free markets were destroyed by constant government intervention as America accepted the Keynesian/socialist notion that it was, and is, the role of government to centrally plan the economy.

But the future is calling and the paradigm is rapidly shifting.  They won't mention this shift on the television or in the major publications, however, so those still mired in the 20th century way of thinking do not yet realize that it is happening.  But if we look around our world we can quite clearly observe the shift in motion.

Look at the explosion of alternative media resources on the Internet.  While estimates suggest that only five companies (Time Warner, News Corp, Viacom, Bertelsmann AG, Walt Disney) control more than three quarters of all major media properties (television, cinema, book publishers, magazines, newspapers), there is now a myriad of alternate media sources working diligently to provide unfiltered news and information.  The Internet has allowed alternative media to flourish, and people are beginning to see that most mainstream ‘news’ is little more than state propaganda.

Look at the explosion of books and documentaries based on the principles of personal liberty and free markets.  More and more people are waking up to the reality of what has happened over the past century and they are trying to spread the message as best they can.

The deterioration of popular support for the corrupt political system and the equally corrupt and enabling mass media is becoming too obvious for even the ideologically blind to ignore.  Support for politicians is at an all-time low in modern history and people are starting to realize that it is the entire political system that is corrupt rather than one or the other political party.  For example: 

  • Michelle Obama recently cancelled a speech she was scheduled to give at a Kansas high school after nearly 2,000 people signed a petition in protest of her appearance.
  • Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice recently cancelled her scheduled speech at Rutgers University as faculty and students publically protested her appearance citing her “efforts to mislead the American people about the presence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.”
  • Attorney General Eric Holder cancelled his speech at a police academy graduation due to protests asserting that he was an ironic choice given his “tactics of obfuscation and redirection of blame”.
  • Former Vice President Dick Cheney had to cancel multiple appearances in Canada because it was “too dangerous” for him.
  • Former President George W. Bush had to cancel a speech at a Jewish charity gala in Switzerland because he was worried about possible legal action against him for alleged torture.

Read the comments sections on mainstream financial articles that suggest the economy has recovered and the Federal Reserve is the hero – people just aren't buying it anymore.  To counter the teetering support for the political and financial systems, the mainstream media has been working hard to paint the status-quo in a positive light.  Many people aren’t buying the rhetoric and they are actively calling the bluff.

Additionally, it is remarkable how many localities are pushing for secession throughout the world.  Northern California, Texas, Colorado, Vermont, Scotland, Belgium, Bavaria, Catalonia, and Venice are all areas in which residents have voiced support for secession in some capacity due to the ills of government interventions.

Look at the explosion of support the Ron Paul Revolution attracted during his presidential campaigns of 2008 and 2012.  Ron Paul’s efforts awoke a legion of young people dedicated to carrying the message of liberty forward.  The seeds of liberty have been firmly planted in the minds of these young people and those seeds have only begun to blossom.  We will truly witness the historical significance of Ron Paul over the next several decades as these young people develop into principled leaders with a clear understanding of personal liberty and free market economics.

As Ron Paul so often said:  “The Revolution is alive and well…”

History has shown, repeatedly, that the human spirit cannot be conquered.  You may be able to suppress the human spirit for one hundred years or so, but never forever.  The human spirit will always rise.

History has also shown that the collectivist tyrants will do everything in their power to suppress the human spirit and maintain power, and the present day situation is no different.  There are now cameras on every stop light and federal taps on every cell phone for this reason.  Federally funded SWAT teams are now operational in nearly every town and city, and heavy duty military vehicles and equipment are deployed in every major metropolitan city for the same reason.

The PATRIOT Act, which effectively repealed the 4th amendment, was passed for this reason.  The National Defense Authorization Act, which declared the United States a battleground and every American a terrorist suspect, was passed for this reason.  The Department of Homeland Security has purchased millions of rounds of hollow point ammunition, which is illegal under international law, for this reason.  The REAL ID act, which requires States to upload every single American's photograph into a federally monitored facial recognition system, was implemented for this reason.

The power elite are not content to go quietly into the night, to be filed away into the dustbin of history's mistakes so seamlessly. 

Instead, they are prepared to use force to maintain their lordship over the individual.  They are prepared to meet the individual on the battlefield.  What has completely gone over their head, however, is that the individual does not fight on the battlefield of force, but rather the battlefield of thoughts and ideas.

Victor Hugo once said "No army can withstand the strength of an idea whose time has come."

Our time has come.

The revolution is already in motion.  It is a peaceful and intellectual revolution - not one of violence or force, and that is why it will succeed.  The collectivist power elite are ill-prepared to fight on the intellectual battlefield because the results of their ideology are in: they failed and they can no longer convince the individual otherwise.

Brushfires of liberty are burning in the minds of men once again.  And what is so amazing is that this liberty revolution is not constrained to America this time; it is world-wide.  Not only are Americans awakening to the long-forgotten principles of liberty, but so are individuals all over the world.  There is a fierce anti-Euro, anti-collectivist movement sweeping all of Europe as these words are being written.  Meanwhile, much of Asia is becoming more free-market oriented by the day.

History has demonstrated that dying paradigms are sometimes capable of holding on for much longer than anyone can believe.  But they can never last forever.  The current paradigm may be able to linger for a while longer, but make no mistake about it - a major paradigm shift is currently underway.

And make no mistake about it - the individual is rising.


Joe Withrow

aka ZH's joegalt


Joe Galt




The Individual Is RisingIndividual Rising Back Cover



Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
scrappy's picture


I really liked your last article on the sinking ship and this one as well.

Here is a free book that may or may not jive with the work you recommend.

Hard to tell from an exerpt, but like the idea of distributed individual empowerment and localizing while perhaps still "networking" afar.

Keep em coming CD.

Excellent writing.



blindman's picture

Rockpile When I Write The Book 1980
musical suggestion for interlude porpoises
sourly or soulfully. (that garbled statement
took ten minutes with googly chrome)same with
desplorer .....
anyway, like it matters, let me/us move on .....
the best and brightest know where it is happening.

Hohum's picture

ZHers are mostly right.  Government power will decrease, private property will grow.  Where you go wrong, however, is the expectation of ever expanding capital and material abundance.  That will not happen, even with 535 Ron Paul in Congress and Ron Paul as President.  Sorry to be the bearer of bad tidings; I know it's a blow to the ideology around these parts.

the grateful unemployed's picture

took a course on the literature of the american west, some years ago, and the first myth that was destroyed was the role of the individual. the west was won through cooperation. the illusion of the individual helped the social darwinists break us up into little pieces and consumer our labor, in ways that war and slavery had done for centuries before us. now that the need for human labor is nearly over, we may regain our group unity. almost all technology gains are possible  because of slow, dull trial and error efforts. and nearly all the automated processes replicate human efforts (see scientific management). a factory manager watched his workers and observed which workers did the best, and made that the next training class. certainly there is more human dignity when the slaves are freed, the factory workers relieved of their dull repetitive tasks. the social darwinists aren't going to give mankind anything, which is why we have the 1%/99%. Obama has thrown you all a few bones, which you have to beg for, thanks but no thanks. any human being on this planet shares the right the goods and productivity on this planet. the automated system is built on their DNA, but they won't give it to you, you're going to have to take it as your right. 

blindman's picture

ask 'what is sovereignty?'. how has it played
out in an historic context? how will it play
out going forward? I have my own perspective
(on these things) as must everyone else I
The Century of the Self
more "century" documentary.

joegalt's picture

I have read several comments suggesting this excerpt is ignorant because the story of America’s founding was a hoax from the beginning.  I have done research on this topic and the conclusion I came to was simply I cannot know for sure.  I am quite sure those of us who went through the government educational system were fed faulty history so this is certainly a possibility.

My question is:  Does it matter?

Even if America’s founding was an illusion, are not the principles of self-reliance and self-government still desirable?  And by self-reliance I mean voluntary human action to solve problems.  I don’t mean that everyone has to live alone on a self-sufficient farm and never interact with another human being.

I will also suggest that ‘American Exceptionalism’ stems from government education and indoctrination rather than the principles of the individualist philosophy.  Individual sovereignty has nothing to do with nationality.  After all, what are modern nations if not arbitrary lines on a map within which a small group of men with guns bully the poor saps who happen to be born there.

Sean7k's picture

I don't know whether to laugh or cry. 

Once you dismiss the cornerstone of your assumptions (The original american liberty argument)what does it matter? It matters because now you want to argue two ideals sans a reference point. Are self reliance and government desirable? Perhaps, it depends on your definition. 

Self reliance is great, except no one can do everything and specialization has its' place, especially in regard to efficiency and production. This suggests we need to be able to depend on community as well, which in turn requires definition of the limits of what this community can require from its' members.

Self government is too vague a term to be useful. It would require a debate on personal responsibility and how one person's rights affect anothers. Government implies laws which leads me to my next point.

It requires a discussion of law and the dangers and benefits which could accrue, thus the means used to diminish its' capacity to be tainted and turned against its' stated purposes. 

My understanding is this is a primer. Let your book speak for itself. If it is being published, someone was impressed enough to take a risk and give your ideas exposure. You should be proud of a signficant accomplishment. You have received feedback that has challenged your beliefs. You can now choose to investigate and learn or cover your head and ask what went wrong.

I hope you choose the former. None of us has gotten it right the first tme. Knowledge is cumulative. Still, you are asking the right questions and walking towards a honorable goal. How many people ever get to where you have already arrived? Best of luck!


Blood Spattered Banner's picture

To your last point, Ayn Rand is a big reason for the perversion of what you call 'Individualism', which is what led to the 'American Exceptionalist' bullshit.  Perception is reality with this issue, and nothing will change until this false ideology is replaced with an anonymous and collective movement (see Federalist Papers).  Also, the founding fathers didn't believe in 'Individualism' as an ideology or theory, but rather that all individuals have undeniable rights.  They very much looked at the nation as a "Union" or "Confederacy" and sum of it's parts, see Jefferson's quote here:


"We of the United States, you know, are constitutionally and conscientiously democrats. We consider society as one of the natural wants with which man has been created; that he has been endowed with faculties and qualities to effect its satisfaction by concurrence of others having the same want; that when, by the exercise of these faculties, he has procured a state of society, it is one of his acquisitions which he has a right to regulate and control, jointly indeed with all those who have concurred in the procurement, whom he cannot exclude from its use or direction more than they him." 
-- Thomas Jefferson; from letter to P. S. Dupont de Nemours (April 24, 1816)

blindman's picture

separation of powers or pyramided social
control (sovereignty high jacking). notice
the irrelevance of congress and the separation
of powers doctrine, smell the banker fascism?
the patriot act, ndaa, secret trade alliances and
judicial systems, the empiric presidency. the indispensable
global police and war efforts increasingly privatized,
contracted and corporate including tax havens.
"enlightened" fascism is the future being forged.
they have left but one stone unturned, the truth.

NuYawkFrankie's picture

re The Individual Is Rising

If it's rising off the sofa  to get a cold 'un outta the fridge - then, yes, the Individual Is Rising

Zero-risk bias's picture

+1 for the positivity. Thanks, and peace.

spooz's picture

The quote is a good one, the source is not a famous philosopher, however, but Chuck Palahniuk, author of The Fight Club. An appropriate quote for ZH, and I agree with your analysis

Blood Spattered Banner's picture

lol, should've had the /sarc tag after the philosopher bit.

Yes, it is from fight club.  But I would argue that Tyler is indeed a famous philosopher now ;)

Blood Spattered Banner's picture

Well written article, but misguided.  'Rugged Individualism' is what spawned the travesty known as 'American Exceptionalism', and this article appears to center around that ideology.  If your proposed revolution of the individual is indeed beginning, it will fail before it even leaves the ground.  As a famous philosopher once said:

"You're not special.  You are not a beautiful and unique snowflake. You are the same decaying organic matter as everyone else, and we are all a part of the same compost pile."

The only way the average citizen breaks these chains is through uniting through a common cause, and acting as a body of one.  No ego's, no political parties, no personal beliefs; none of that shit.  We're so far away from anything substantial like this.  Until groups like OWS and the Tea Party find common ground the revolution is indeed dead.  And I think we all know how far off that unison is.  Why?  Because they are acting on their INDIVIDUAL beliefs as an organization, and ignoring the common issues they both protest against.

scrappy's picture

Common Sense - Common Wealth.

A way to transend the false divide.

Armed Resistance's picture

I completely disagree with your asertion.  While INDIVIDUALS, it is our common humanity and respect for God's natural laws (Bill of Rights) that unite us.  We may disagree on the role and size of government and governmental services, but most everybody will agree that the Fourth Amendment's purpose of restricting illegal search and seizure is paramount to a free society.  It is the same for the NSA surveilance controversy.

As individuals, we must be allowed to succeed or fail based on our own input into our lives and the world around us.  At the same time, we can "collectively" see the harm in distruptions to the ability for individuals to remain free.  A kid who bullies somebody else shouldn't do it not because we pass laws against it, but because it is an afront to our humanity as individuals.

overmedicatedundersexed's picture

Hi joe, looks like a good read for many not long to ZH or never here. one may view history from many angles. technology is one, used by elite to direct control motivate and produce fear, and limit choice. (think for an american this small sentence: " mr joe the IRS is on the phone".

those who have power today, have more power than any tyrant in history..old methods may be useless today, but an old mid east saying still applies" The sword of god is the empty belly of the poor."

I would add: what if they gave an election and no one voted?

mijev's picture

Why the hell would anyone be dumb enough to vote?

Creepy Lurker's picture

The dead and household pets always vote.

joegalt's picture

Thank you kindly for the thoughtful comment.

“I would add: what if they gave an election and no one voted?”

Wouldn’t we be so lucky?  “You stop this tyranny right now or we are going to vote even harder!”

Cognitive Dissonance's picture

"I would add: what if they gave an election and no one voted?"

'They' would call it a landslide victory and a mandate for 'change'.  :)

Bemused Observer's picture

A lot of people seem to have the idea that it is one or the other, individualism or a more 'collective' spirit. And I also notice a lot of folks favor the individual over the collective.
I think we as a species are both. We are individuals, but we live collectively. We always have. The first 'collectives' were families, then clans, tribes, then city-states, etc. Even in the closest of families, individuals within those families must often compromise, with someone giving up certain individual 'rights' for the good of the collective. For instance, I have a right to eat what I catch, grow, etc. But I may, at times, give up that right so that someone else may eat. So, no one has what I'd call perfect rights. We all give and take, and share. In early collectives, the individual is known to the group, which makes the whole sharing thing much easier. The collective works because it knows and values the individual.

But when we gather in larger groups, as we are now, no one knows who the individual IS anymore. It's not your wife, son,'s some random guy you never met, never heard of, and who gives a fuck what his problem is? It is easier to deny that individual something he is asking for, even something like food, shelter, water, if you never have to see his face when you say, "No!" If you never have to pass him and see the results of your refusal, you won't have to watch him slowly starve in front of your eyes.

We need to go smaller again. Back to more intimate groupings. Yes, that means a certain amount of "tribalism" which does lead to conflicts, but it also allows for people of very different cultures, views, to find a 'home' among like-minded people. And that kind of security actually reduces conflict.

What we have now, with this wanna-be global society, is a homogenized stew where everyone is supposed to blend. And there's nowhere to go to be among your own 'kind', when people DO they are seen as rebels, bigots, troublemakers. Without a 'home', these people are pushed up in each other's faces 24/7, and end up feeling as if they are under constant siege.

I don't think we are ready for a large collective society. Technology gives us the means, but Nature hasn't caught up with tech yet. Those who want to advance see the technology as the way to achieve this, unfortunately the ones in power tend to see it very differently, as a way to control the masses. The idealist's desires enable the ones in power to use the tech for very non-collectivist ends, and the masses get double-teamed by both.

Cathartes Aura's picture

thank you for taking the time to illustrate the different ways the word "collective" can be used, and ultimately settling on an intentional collection of like-minds choosing to group.

We need to go smaller again. Back to more intimate groupings. Yes, that means a certain amount of "tribalism" which does lead to conflicts, but it also allows for people of very different cultures, views, to find a 'home' among like-minded people. And that kind of security actually reduces conflict.

as someone who has experienced various voluntary groupings of humans living outside the "recognised" systems pretty much all of my adult life, I can only encourage others to examine just what it is they truly believe "reality" IS, and see if others who agree can be found.  that is "community" for me, and those of my "tribe" - refined over time, and a comfortable fit as I grow older.

CH1's picture

The core issue:

Voluntary collective action, or

coerced collective action?

The first is cool, the second is immoral... always.

Bemused Observer's picture

True collectivism is ALWAYS voluntary. When it is enforced by power, it becomes one of the many "isms". Those "isms" are usually used to denigrate the whole idea of collectivism without real understanding of what it is supposed to be. And, all of the "isms" depend on collectivism of one kind or another.

But scale is everything. Without force, you cannot have a huge collectivist society. Once things become so large that you no longer know your neighbor, the volunteerism dries up.

When things get so big, people with different beliefs NEED their own space if they are to respect the "commons". It's when you force them together that they begin to act defensively, which negates the whole idea behind forcing them together in the first place.

Cathartes Aura's picture

agreed.  "coerced" usually needs to be enForced, and that's where the Laws creep in, and governments of imposed rulerships with military get enActed on the peoples, because inevitably

there are profitable wars to fight over resources.

DOT's picture

Stopping the impulse to share what we do not have is a problem that has long stood in the way of peaceful coexistence.

Ask Jean Valjean

jayman21's picture

Hi has been awhile - Any thoughts on rotting from within?  Martin's research has been pretty clear on the fall of an empire always coming from first a financial crisis and then just rotting from within until it collapses.  I have a hard time believing this will be peaceful and turning the other cheek is probably better advise.  This is based on having the assumption that you believe these things run in cycles which is the bases of Martin's work.


In our current case, low interest rates are killing the pension plans and the political class has gone exponential on debt issuance.  The classic overshoot or phased transition to use Martin's words.  Per Martin's research, Rome fell due to pensions not being paid and things got real violent after that.  Rome was weak and then someone else was able to knock it over.  Add the sovereign debt crisis to today's mix, and it will be combustible as people will not get paid and it will be sudden.  Martin said at his last conference in March that his advice was to "Duck" and we were not playing duck duck goose.


I would prefer the peaceful solution, but Martin has said time and time again the political class never steps aside in a peaceful way.  The invisible hand is always there and it does some pretty nasty things over history.  The examples cited above look less like a peaceful reaction and more like a chess move.


Rome fell in about 8 years per Martin's research.  We are coming up on 8 years after the financial crisis.

Sean7k's picture

Try reading, "The Fall of the Roman Empire" by Heather. Martin evidently hasn't done much research. Though I agree that passive resistance is easier during times of stability or growth than during times of descension.

jayman21's picture

I cannot edit.

**Correction Rome fell about 8 years after its financial crisis.  It was rotten to the core and was unable to weather any storm which feels like the USA right now.

**Sean7k - "Martin has not done much research."  Ok.  Not a very good point, but point taken.  I will have a look at the book you recommended. I am assuming you know who Martin is.  Just in case.

I cannot find the the research I was referencing, but I did find a summary.  I remember reading one of his large reports that went though the entire process of an empire collapsing and the part that stuck in my head is how quickly it went after it had its major financial crisis.  They too were unable to clean it up just like our 2008 one vs. the S&L crisis in the 1980s which was cleaned up pretty quick.

Sean7k's picture

Yes, I do. You might want to look at the change in his opinions pre and then post prison.

The reasons for the fall are many, but for an empire that persisted into the second millenium, eight years is laughable. Thanks for your response, it shows real credibility.

Sean7k's picture

First, I have long championed individual liberty within social collectives (communities). This being said, this author has produced a pollyanna, america centric fantasy that ignores history and the real purpose of the internet.

The internet is the means by which the Elites are controlling humanity worldwide. It is media on steroids. So, how is it supposed to function as a tool to create new freedoms? They control content, access and the psychology on all boards and sites. Your every keystroke is recorded and analyzed. 

For example, I checked a newstory on a site from a site I am NOT registered on. There is no reason for my FULL name to be known, but there it was, as they asked me to recommend this article to others. 

If you think a large swath of humanity is seeking liberty, then you might want to get out of your basement and experience the real world. In the US alone, more than half the population is dependent on a government entitlement. Europe is even worse. These types of dependencies are not easily thrown away. 

Slavery is an institution that has lasted since the beginning of civilization. Just as divine right, in some form or another, has existed to take advantage of it. In the US, we are so ignorant of our own Constitution, we fail to see what kind of document it is. A lot of wonderful phrases, but a rotten core designed to assign debt owed to the King of England (who also ran France) to maintain ownership and control of his colony that continues to today. 

Can the People withdrawl from the iron grasp of the despots? Sure. Will they? C'est possible. Probable? I wouldn't take that bet in a thousand years. Something very evil is at work in the organization of human opportunity and it is coalescing, not dispersing. This chapter is just more hope for the hopeful. It is dangerously misleading and uninformed. 

There is a whole world out there, hooked on drugs- both food and chemical, bodies riddled with disease, minds polluted with desires which are counter-productive, violent first reactions and war minded, ignorant of history and uneducated because of State intervention. Just because some of us have awakened to the terrible tyranny of history does not equate to a revolution that can overthrow ten thousand years of conditioning and social custom.


Cognitive Dissonance's picture

If you are condemning the whole you are condemning yourself as an individual and part of the whole. Why is it that you see yourself as above others when you are so much like the others. EVERYONE sees themselves as unique, just as you and I both do.

Regardless of whether you see it as futile to resist because the herd is so weak and easily controlled or you are part of the herd and simply don't resist, the results are the same. So how does that make you any different from everyone else? Because you 'see', because you are 'aware'.

Action speaks so much louder than words Sean. Become active as an individual if for no other reason than to be an individual and not just part of a subset of a subset of the herd.

Sean7k's picture

Cog, please show me where my criticisms of the chapter are in error. 

I do NOT find it futile to resist, otherwise, I would not make the comments I do. However, resistance is strengthen by an informed education and knowledge of history. This chapter is a mess. It shows an extraordinary ignorance. 

Worse, it fails to make concrete suggestions to accomplish the means. Perhaps, the remainder of the book does this, I really hope so. Still, the cavalier attitude it takes toward the control existing from State intervention IS pollyanna. His remarks on Europe are based on a few news stories, ignoring a thousand years of history and tradition and what that means to a population. Europeans have always demonstrated and rebelled, but this does not mean they want complete independence. 

Writing a book and selling it are not "action". It is an entreprenuerial effort. 

Action would entail setting up black markets, dealing in Consitutional money (silver and gold), resisting the actions of the law, educating your children in real history and politcal economy, developing community groups and trade mechanisms, tax resistance, military resistance and diminishing the vote. 

I have great respect for your ideas cog, but trying to guilt or shame me for valid criticisms will be challenged head on. 

Cognitive Dissonance's picture

Sean7k, this isn't even a 'chapter' of the book. As I say at the top "From Chapter Four" which means there is more to the chapter, let alone the book. How anyone can expect a short excerpt to be complete is beyond me. And I am not trying to guilt or shame you. But for you to declare that the author says, or does not say, this or that based upon a short excerpt isn't reasonable or fair and you wouldn't wish it to be done to you if the situation were reversed.

Sean7k's picture

" The American spirit was once firm on the principles of personal liberty, property rights, free markets, and non-intervention". This statement has zero basis in historical fact. It is the "illusion" we have been trained to believe.

Did not the author write these words? 

Now, I provided the caveat that I hoped there was more and I really do. However, based on the comments in this short, partial chapter, the author is ignoring readily available historical research. He is trading on sentiment and I find that a slippery slope. 

On second reading, my criticisms probably sound too harsh, but assumptions are the foundations for any argument and therefore central to any conclusions which will be drawn. 

You failed to argue any of my criticisms, but relied instead on a guilt based response. So, don't lie to me. Further, you are wrong in concluding I would not wish the same for myself. We learn from our mistakes or we should. It forces us to be more disciplined in our work. I have to continuously challenge my beliefs (as I know you do as well) and I profit from it.

An initial response similar to what you posted previously on the broad brush approach and target audience would have been a much more salient response. I have found Joe's responses to be much more in line with the level of the material.

eddiebe's picture

You are correct. The 'turning the other cheek' comment is my comment, not an interpretation and unfortunately valid. I would also like to point out that Joe makes this statement:' It is a peaceful and intellectual revolution - not one of violence or force, and that is why it will succeed.' 

Cog, I respect you and wish I could hang with you. This is strictly a comment.

Cognitive Dissonance's picture

I understand and I appreciate the time you take to comment. Thank you. When you placed "turning the other cheek' in quotation marks it was implying a quotation from the book excerpt.

The seeds of most 'revolutions' contain their own destruction. A paradigm change is another matter entirely. The problem with excerpts is that they are incomplete. Joe expands much further in his book. Give it a try.

You might also wish to give a try as a premium member. That is where I hang.  :)

eddiebe's picture

I hope you are right Joe, but I have serious doubts. Your utopia stipulates that reason and compassion will triumph over greed and deceit. Those battles need to be fought on an individual level first and foremost because it is the only place where they can be won. The idea of 'turning the other cheek' will not work as a revolutionary act because the ruling elite just see that as weakness and stupidity.

For example: Go to a slaughterhouse and see what goes on there. 


joegalt's picture

Thank you for taking the time to comment but I will point out:  there is no utopian solution and there never will be.  Who wants a utopia anyway?  I imagine it would be tremendously boring.  That is precisely why independent thought and analysis are so critical – the collectivist utopia will never work.

So to clarify, the revolution referred to in this excerpt is not a “we are going to route the bad guys and live happily ever after” type of revolution.  It is a timely revolution of ideas catching on with a critical mass (but still minority) of people just as the global Ponzi is beginning to implode.


Cathartes Aura's picture

"utopia" is a concept exploited within religious teachings, then used by those who desire to govern over others - hierarchy, with an ultimate figure who care-takes those lower in the ranks.

the utopia sold via those who desire to rule over others often includes a "protection" racket, keeping the herd safe from other predators, whilst simultaneously feeding off the same herd, incrementally. . . aka "nation states".

all through history.  same as it ever was.

Cognitive Dissonance's picture

"The idea of 'turning the other cheek' will not work as a revolutionary act because the ruling elite just see that as weakness and stupidity."

I just read the 'excerpt' again just to make sure I remembered it correctly, and no where did I see Joe advocating 'turning the other cheek'. That appears to be your interpretation. The paperback sells for less that $10, the eBook for less than $5. Why don't you take a chance and see what Joe has to say in its entirety?

I suspect both of us have wasted more money on less important things.

Dagny Taggart's picture

We can never have a healthy whole if the individual parts are not well. I applaud Joe's time and effort to share, bought several copies. Well done.

joegalt's picture

Thanks very much, Dagny.  Please let me know what you think of it.

GoldIsMoney's picture

Way too optimistic. I do not believe that the elites will get down yet. So agreed they may face some resitence. But how often do they speak wherever they want and how many to appriciate them? And so no I don't think that "our" time has come...

Cognitive Dissonance's picture

"And so no I don't think that "our" time has come..."

Whoops. Too late, you waited too long. Your 'time' has passed.  :)

Why are we so obsessed with instant gratification? "Time" is a relative measurement. It can be a second, a month or a century. The problems we face developed over decades if not centuries. Why would we possibly expect them to resolve in a short amount of 'time'?

Joe says many times in the book that this healing process, while already begun, will occur over 'time'. If you have an infection and pop an antibiotic, do you expect it to work immediately? The infection may have taken a week to develop. Is it unreasonable to expect the antibiotic to take a few days to begin to reverse the process of infection and 10-14 days to remove it completely from the system?

Oftentimes in nature the 'cure' takes longer than the disease took to present itself.

no more banksters's picture

First of all, the Fed is not controlled by the government, but by the international banksters - the biggest private banks, responsible for expanding the supposedly "free market". Also, the mainstream media are not controlled by any government, they are controlled by the owners of the supposedly free market which is not free. The concept of liberty has been downgraded by the same powers that pull the government strings, that is the "free market" owners. Therefore, the so called "free market" is just an illusion:

The illusion of the self-regulating society through the deregulated market

How Western societies lost their faith in Vision

Farqued Up's picture

My gut was thinking Pollyanna when I was reading it. My nagging thoughts were of the millions of Takers and the fleecing of the productive. This will not be a smooth transition, we will either be totalitarian or free and the final verdict is already cemented, IMO. The USA is doomed. I also think the Tats aren't expressions of individuality but rather the dumbed down populace by the government schools.

For those awaiting the Calvary to ride in and save us, look up, the Calvary has been replaced with drones to kill us. It was even proposed by one Rep. to use drones to kill people that want to leave peacefully.

For all of you devout Christians, the Rapture isn't coming either, so get motivated for self-help. BTW, I'm not Christian but I have a few candidates for your consideration for the AntiChrist.

Cognitive Dissonance's picture

"For those awaiting the Calvary to ride in and save us, look up, the Calvary has been replaced with drones to kill us."

You are the Calvary. Save yourself. Then help others along the path you took.

That is the process of being an individual first while working collectively to help each other. Notice I am not speaking of being a 'collective' or about a group of human drones.