"The Catcher in the Rye": Is Modern 'Culture' a Psy-Op?

May 19, 2010

salingercatcher.JPGThe book "seems like a beginner's manual for how to screw yourself up when you are too young to know any better."

by Matthew (for henrymakow.com)


"The Catcher in the Rye" by J.D. Salinger  reveals a great deal about modern society.

The book is a first-person narrative of 16-year old Holden Caulfield,
who, after getting kicked out of prep school in Pennsylvania, goes to New York and begins a self-indulgent episode that involves picking up a prostitute, getting beat up, getting drunk, getting lonely, visiting his younger sister, an old teacher, and wandering around the city.

Holden carries an alienated, negative and isolated outlook on life, seeing himself as an outsider, and criticizing things he sees as superficial, often using the word "phony". This attitude is characteristic of some Jewish authors like J.D. Salinger, who feel like outsiders.  Unfortunately this satanic "modern, alienated from God and man " attitude has been spread widely.

Caulfield uses the word "goddamn" to express his frustration. He also has a fantasy of being a "catcher in the rye", a sort of hero who protects children running around in a rye field on the edge of a cliff in case they wander too close - falling off symbolizes the evils of adulthood. [Could it be a reference to saving the children from pedophiles?- HM]

This fantasy is then rebuked by his admired English teacher. At the end of the book, he alludes to "getting sick" and living in a mental hospital.

EFFECT ON YOUTH

Holden's disposition appeals
to teenagers who don't have a sense of identity and are trying to find one but don't know where or how.  It seems that this book plays on these feelings, leading them to self-destructive solutions, devoid of any sense of inner-wisdom or conscience.

Thinking back on when I read the book, it left me with a feeling of hopelessness, further deepening the illusion of separateness from other people.  Holden's nihilism is celebrated and justified as something normal which need not be questioned or corrected.  I also think the first-person style of the book does a lot to reinforce these feelings, as the reader unconsciously identifies with Holden.

Simply put, it seems like a beginner's manual for how to screw yourself up when you are too young to know any better. Or maybe it's a "green light" for doing whatever you want and letting your ego completely take over - "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law" as Crowley put it - let your mind and desire do what it wants and don't worry about it!  So why is it required reading in the schools?
I believe this book to be one of the major ways the Illuminati has been able to change people's behavior (especially males) in the West, through its mandatory use in school curricula as well as incessant mentioning and glorification in the mass media (movies, books, music) over the many decades.  A true case of psychological warfare and social engineering by way of the education system and mass media.

Just look at how much it's been mentioned in the media! It sells 250,000 copies a year.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_references_to_the_novel_The_Catcher_in_the_Rye


It is part of a massive covert attack on intrinsic human morality and values.  I also believe it is being used as a programming "script" akin to Alice in Wonderland and The Wizard of Oz to program people in covert mind control operations (many people in Hollywood are such people) as well as to constantly reinforce the programming through its repeated appearances in the mass media.

I remember thinking "Why are we reading this?" in my high school
English class and now I am beginning to understand why.  I remember reading about how "The Catcher in the Rye" is Winona Ryder's (Horowitz's) favorite book and that she apparently owns every edition. Knowing about Ms. Ryder's "adventurous" life, I thought it was interesting that her godfather was Timothy Leary (involved in CIA LSD experimentation), whom her parents were friends with.  Also, Aldous Huxley's wife were friends of her parents. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winona_Ryder

USED FOR BRAINWASHING

"The Catcher in the Rye" had been used as a "mechanism of control" in the assassination of John Lennon, and the attempted assassination of Ronald Reagan. If you recall, both Hinkley and Chapman had the novel after their respective rampages. In fact, when the New York City police apprehended Chapman in the aftermath of Lennon's assassination, he was sitting glassy-eyed and zombified, leaning against the Dakota Building, reading Salinger's book."

JD_Salinger.jpg"According to Ian Hamilton's biography, Salinger (left) was in the employ of Defense Intelligence during World War II, serving with the Counter Intelligence Corps (CIC), his time spent mainly in the interrogation of captured Nazis. Later on, toward the end of the war, Salinger was involved in the de-nazification of Germany."

"Denazification of Germany" = Communist/NWO takeover, in my opinion.

So, Salinger was an INTELLIGENCE operative, interrogating (or maybe programming?) captured Nazis.

 "Is The Catcher in the Rye a Mechanism of Control?" by Adam Gorightly
theorizes that the book could have been used as a programming tool for
Manchurian Candidate-type assassins: http://www.whale.to/b/gorl.html

If anyone has any previous knowledge on mind-control programming, especially Fritz Springmeier's work, the role of this book in two assassinations is significant.  Added to this the fact that the book is required reading in many schools across the country, despite many efforts to ban it.  It has "has been banned more times than any other book from the American school syllabus", with good reason I suspect in light of its possible use as a model of demoralization, not to mention a programming script /trigger to pre-existing mind-controlled slaves.

To understand some of the possible effects this book has had on society, read "Holden Caulfield Syndrome" -- http://12gauge.com/books_2003_mordue_catcher.html

I also thought it was interesting to read about a Salinger story in a recent article on this site. Your reader related that his workplace is infested by Freemasons:

"Then my close colleague loaned me another book, stating that its content reminded him of my family and that I should be sure to read the first chapter, a short story by J.D Salinger entitled "A Perfect Day for Bananafish". The last line described the protagonist suddenly, with no foreshadowing of the event, blowing his brains out with a pistol." http://www.henrymakow.com/uncovering_occultism_in_the_ca.html

So is it just me looking too far into this, or is there something sinister about this book and its author?

 

 


 



Comments for ""The Catcher in the Rye": Is Modern 'Culture' a Psy-Op? "

Matthew (author) said (May 22, 2010):

I thank Paul for sharing the Tarpley passage connecting George Bush with the book. I could see how one, with no knowledge or understanding of extremely sophisticated mind control technologies, might think that the most logical explanation is that Salinger based Holden's character on Bush, given the parallels. Tarpley uses a whole paragraph to quote some lines from the book, but doesn't connect them
to the persona of Bush. Only when Sally's friend "George" is mentioned is there some connection. But Tarpley is a long way from convincing me. Why would he have chosen George Bush of all people to base Holden's character on way back then before he became well-known?

However, in light of this book's notoriety in connection with Manchurian Candidates and possible Monarch slaves (Winona), as well as
understanding how covert mind control works, creating multiple programmed personalities by traumas and advanced technologies, it
makes more sense that George Bush was programmed with the book's content. This would have made him assume the identity of Holden,
including his demented outlook on the world, which would have made him useful as ruthless puppet in his roles of leadership for his handlers
and controllers. This also might explain some things Bush said which sounded a lot like Holden to Mr. Tarpley. If Bush was programmed with
it, how many other ruthless puppets have been too, I wonder?

So I think it's the other way around - Bush is based on Holden, rather than Holden is based on Bush. I don't think the psyops involved had
anything to do with warning anyone about attempting to expose something - I think Salinger was in on it the whole time and was told
not to ever talk about the project, which would explain his reclusiveness.

The film "Conspiracy Theory", a film about government mind control, features "Catcher in the Rye" as the book that Mel Gibson's character,
an MKULTRA mind control victim, compulsively buys but never reads.


Paul said (May 21, 2010):

Hi Henry, one more to add to the list as far as Catcher in the Rye is concerned:

“One more to add to the pot is Robert John Bardo, who took a bus from Tucson, Arizona to Hollywood because of his obsession with Rebecca Schaeffer an actor of TV sitcom “My Sister Sam”. Bardo carried a copy of the book (Catcher in the Rye) with him when he shot the actor in front of her apartment. There is some evidence that all three of these men were in a state of “being out of it” when apprehended and interviewed afterwards.”


This is taken from the book that I am currently writing.


Jo said (May 21, 2010):

Catcher was required reading when I was 16. We were asked to identify the causes of Holden's angst in writing, then the class discussed how to avoid those causes and those brought up in the discussion. We discussed his nihilism then why it was an inappropriate response to angst. We also talked about appropriate ways to express angst (e.g., keeping a journal, talk to a trusted sibling or parent, speak with the school counselor, etc.).

Holden wasn't presented to us as anything other than a human being with human experiences and human emotions, certainly not any kind of role model.

But that was back in 1975 in the US...

--

Jo,

Yes but why focus on this subject at all? Why this novel instead of one about a young man with a positive energetic philosophy of life?

henry


Paul said (May 21, 2010):

First see: http://tarpley.net/?s=salinger. J D Salinger acted like he was afraid following his success. Supposing that Webster Tarpley is
right and that he insulted George H W Bush by basing a character on him, then might it not make sense to conjecture that the black ops
assassination team control either resided with H W and or served him.

The use of the book was a psyops indeed and it warned anyone who might follow in J D Salinger's tracks. That is, a warning to "sensitives"/psychics/intuitives to back off from insulting, let alone identifying That Hideous Strength that seeks to overturn morality and
stamp upon humanity's throat. Salinger likely knew how corrupt and controlled everything was and as such, simply retreated into his realm. Not unlike Stanley Kubrick - another related story. See Jay Weidner for that.


ROBERT said (May 21, 2010):

As the author of the article cited at the end of this piece, I must say that I never stated that my workplace was infested by Freemasons (a commentator hypothesized this), although, considering the bizarre goings-on in the House of Commons, the possibility certainly often crossed my mind. It would not be surprising; as investigative journalist Paul Palango revealed in his 2008 book, Dispelling the Fog, about the RCMP: "A police force acting like a cult is not a new idea. Police live in a world of 'them against us' where it is easy to become isolated from the rest of society. They eat, drink and, all too often, sleep with each other. ... Because of [the unhealthy bond police officers often have with each other], police forces are havens for secret societies like the Masons Order--the mafia of the mediocre, as it has been dubbed. One can't get ahead, even today, in the Calgary Police Force without being a Mason, police insiders say. The Masons are also prominent in the RCMP..." (p. 248). Few members of the public are aware of these affiliations.


Carmen said (May 20, 2010):

Today's article by Mathew is very enlightening. Several years ago I took the bait after hearing incessantly "The Catcher in the Rye" referred to and purchased a copy. I only made it through a few pages and was more repulsed than curious as to why it had been so lauded; and literally threw the book in the trash. My spirit feels confirmed after reading this post that it really isn't worth reading and can be quite damaging especially to young male psyche's.


high preistess said (May 20, 2010):

While I was in school, I had to write a paper for English literature on a Catcher in the Rye. My main thoughts were toward
asking the question, why were these books present when two assassins perfected their plans? First I obviously looked at
Ronald Reagan and his would be assassin John Hinckley, was carrying a copy of A Catcher in the Rye.

John Lennon's assassin Mark Chapman rented a hotel room and then staked out Lennon's apartment. In his room was
not the Bible, but a copy of A catcher in the rye. Thought you would find that interesting.

Maybe mandatory reading for manchurian candidates?? I always thought there was a conspiracy around this book.


Jason said (May 20, 2010):

I'm unaware of any unusual connections here but I do recall reading that Bill Gates (Microsoft) most favorite book is The Catcher in the Rye.

Some may doubt this however I should note that his youngest daughter's name is Phoebe.

Phoebe is Holden Caulfield's younger sister and only living sibling. She is the only one that Holden does not find to be a "phony" and therefore completely trusts....due to her innocence etc. In return Phoebe looks up to Holden as her hero.


David said (May 20, 2010):

Dear Henry, glad to know there are thoughtful individuals like Matthew who question why books like Catcher In the Rye have to be forced down the throat of every generation of schoolkid since their publication. As if there weren't 10's of thousands of other worthy books out there that deserve to be read!

As a native of the American South, I have seen the same phenomenon with To Kill A Mockingbird, the one and only published novel of the eminently forgettable Harper Lee. The subliminal intent there is obvious: keep the races divided and ripping at each others' throats, while ensuring that every new generation of Southerner continues to be regarded as the damned of polite society. Educators are always aghast when they hear you haven't gotten around to reading both these books. You're like a psyche ward patient who refuses to take his meds.

I'm sure if there was a concerted effort to retire Catcher for favor of other works in the Western literary canon, we would no doubt hear shrieks that its removal from the curriculum is tantamount to book-burning by the Nazis...which, come to think of it, is just the kind of knee-jerk reaction that suggests it is a psy-ops.


Bob said (May 20, 2010):

I thought this was fantastic.
It raises an issue I've been
thinking about for a long time.
Namely, the role of the state in
selecting literature syllabi. In
a word, I think it's brainwashing,
by definition.

I don't think the state should have
any role whatsoever in storytelling.
Sounds like an extreme, yet flat
point of view, but defensible nonetheless.
Agents of the state cannot develop
sustainable art, culture and literature,
such activity leads to nihilism and
grotesquerie. There's a book written
about this that the Mises Institute.


Henry Makow received his Ph.D. in English Literature from the University of Toronto in 1982. He welcomes your comments at