The Zeitgeist Movement - Podcast show now online!

Post Reply New Topic

You see guys, the point here is simple. If you ask me something, I will answer it, but the reason why so many threads like this become a huge circus of nothingness is because you people are never satisfied with any answer and prefer to argue, and argue and argue, round and round and round until the central point itself is lost.

From now on, ask me individual questions. I answer them, then we move on. If my answer didn't satisfy you, then by all means ask for elaboration, but going back and forth arguing semantics because the central point gets lost is pointless and will get none of us anywhere.

First off, it would be a good idea to visit this website, for those of you., and you know who you are that need spoonfeeding of this material:

www.thezeitgeistmovement.com

Go through that, and CROSS-CHECK this data with other sources and other information.

I am not walking anyone else through this information. You need to use your OWN brains and hense do your OWN thinking instead of lazily sitting at your keyboards arguing the toss with someone purely because you cannot be bothered to look for yourself.

You REALLY expect humanity to move forward by not doing our own thinking and becoming our own leaders?

I think the problem with this board is because people want specific details to be proven or justified before considering a bigger picture. I am like that too but I can also take the longview and see a broader picture but I also get bogged down with details. I understad the idea of our ancestors beliefs being hyjacked by religion, and obviously for controlling purposes so I can handle that bit. But I have problems with the economy, because I think it is an NT propelled discipline and is basically a game. I get turned off with it.

ok. a question, adam. i've read about the ideals the zeigeist movement people talk of. i have also read about the things they don't like in the current milieu. ihave, however, never come across anything that seemed like a strategy to get from one to the other. could you briefly outline it, and if relevant provide a link to somewhere that spells it out?

ta.

The Zeitgeist Movement can't succeed unless a tipping point number of people agree to try it. This could only happen with an aggressive conversion effort. Becoming annoyed when people remain unconvinced does not constitute the necessary effort. A tipping point can't be reached in that way. Greater effort at salesmanship of this concept is required.


Like Peebo, my previous rounds with this concept many months ago led me to wonder about plans for implementation. There are none. I suggested computer simulations (similar to SimCity) and small-scale community trials (similar to the Amish) but so far this remains nothing more than internet chatter. And there it will stay...forever. Because the people that favor it are unwilling to do the legwork that would show this is feasable and sell it it as a concept and instead insist that people should educate themselves through website visits. Oh well.

I have absolutely no interest in seeing Zeitgeist Movement come to fruition. But the people who do seem to have done even less thinking about implementation than I have.

The Zeitgeist advocacy of clean green hydro-electric power is in reality the advocacy a hydro storage battery for a nuclear power plant.

Well, this will just be a case of biosocial pressures. As the economic downturn starts turning the screw further and further we will start seeing a rise in crime, poverty and possibly wars as well. Resources will become even more strained and prices will increase.

The only thing we CAN do as the movement is to be there as the pillow for these economic hardships and offer a way into a better future. At present we haven't got the numbers we need yet to do what we want to do. That's why spreading awareness is critical. Human beings are generally creatures of necessity. As long as they feel somewhat comfortable in their environment, they won't have any incentive to improve anything.

The pressures of scraping to survive will wear thin on society, and hopefully there will be enough people who are willing to stand up and say:

"You know what, to hell with this. I want a better world. Things are going from bad to worse, and I want my life back. I want my freedom."

As rich and powerful as the "elite" might seem, they only comprise about 1% of the planet's population. No army on the planet can subdue a critical mass which comprises the majority of the population that are equipped with the tools of analytical, critical and objective thinking. There's a hell of a lot more of us. Tough luck for them.

Time will have to tell with how we get from here to there. I gotta be honest and say that what happens from now to then is completely up to all of you. If we do nothing to push forward for an RBE, then I guarantee you, that an RBE will not materialise.

The Zeitgeist Movement is here as a pillow, or buffer if you will to the biosocial pressures that you will see growing all over the world during the collapse to offer people a way out. The reassurance that life doesn't have to be like this. To provide information and through that information, hopefully the motivation to actually bring these ideas to fruition.

what is being offered is the proposal of a shift in value systems towards the alignment with natural law, and the implementation of automated resource management so that people will ARRIVE at decisions as opposed to making them, and this in part will render the idea of "government" completely obsolete, and hense will be shed, along with all the other BS that we have been taught is mandatory and/or necessary. Not that governments are already obsolete. It's just the further they try to "govern", the more they show themselves up as such.

Personally I can't see any logical reason to "resist" us advocating, implementing, and enjoying a system where every human being on the planet is cared for. With time, the logic of this direction will become self-evident. The individual specifics of whether we pull together 1000 organisations with TZM and work to make it happen, or whether its achieved through TZM alone, it doesn't matter. The end goal is the same. To live in a sustainable, humane and prosperous way. And I think all of us who wish for a better world are ALL on the same page there.

Why would people "resist" the world coming together to share this planet and optimise everything so that everyone is cared for, everyone is provided for, everyone is liberated from life-wasting labour, and everyone is free to do what they want to do and be want they want to be? There's only two reasons why I can imagine people have a problem with this. First is those who have a severe case of capitalist conditioning that is staunchly against ANYTHING that impinges upon their illusion of a right to be a greedy, ignorant bully. They call themselves "free men" but that falsehood can only be maintained because the methods of control and states of corruption are hidden from the public to maintain the illusion of governmental altruism,

Also coz the public are conditioned to accept everything as the way it is and that any dissent is given the full force of law, so really, its just acceptance through fear and naivety. and

The mandatory use of money keeps people in line coz everything has a price-tag and your freedom only exends to the bounds of your bank balance.

They call THAT freedom, and yet they accuse an RBE of being an oppressive system. It really amuses me sometimes, and it's just blatantly obvious to me. But then again, I actually use this grey thing in my skull called a brain.

And the other reason would be that they are suffering from some severe moral distortion or psychological problem. Either way, as far as I'm concerned, if these people feel some need to impinge upon the freedoms of other people, they need to get help from a good therapist.

But overall, to answer this question I should put it into the 2 different contexts. First the state we are in currently where we are advocating this direction, and second when we are actually putting it into practise and "building" an RBE.

When it comes to the present day scenario, we encourage people to make up their own minds about whether they agree or not. The only thing we ask is that people do enough research in order to fully understand the proposals themselves and the supporting information, and hense have a fully formed and objective understanding of what we advocate. Then and only then can you make a fully formed decision in regards to whether this really is for you or not.

When it comes to when people choose to attack us, or launch hate and deception campaigns against us, and fortunately there are only a handful of dedicated individuals who are determined to smear us as far as they possibly can, we have to do what we can to make sure that while we respect their freedom of speech, we also recognise that there is a certain boundary of animosity and bullying that they teeter on and regularly cross. In such instances we must take objective steps to report such behaviour. It is not our job however to engage them, or attempt to reason with them. I know it is extremely tempting, I myself am guilty of falling to this temptation in the past, coz I am perpetually driven to try to reason with people, I mean I have wasted HOURS trying to reason with them, however there are some people who simply CANNOT be reasoned with. They have already made up their own minds about who and what we are and they feel the need to spread their message of hate and misinformation. As such it is a waste of our time and effort to engage these people coz their minds are too passionately set upon their goals. And no amount of logical reasoning is gonna turn them around. There are MANY more people you can talk to on this planet instead. When you realise that they simply refuse to understand or even research this, then you know its time to move on. It's very much like trying to debate with an evangelical christian. Completely futile coz the person you're trying to rationalise with is completely immune to logic and reason. So please, in other words, don't feed the trolls. These people will be more convinced when they see our statements and proposals actually becoming a reality. So yea. Just move on.

Ok, as for the latter scenario, that being the implementing these proposals in the physical reality with infrastructure and so on, the implication of this question is that an RBE is a mandatory thing. Its not. If you wish to live in a monetary system, then go right ahead. No-one's gonna stop you or hinder you. We only ask that you extend us the same courtousy. You know, if people want to live in an RBE, then they can live in an RBE. If they don't, then they won't.

So to sum up, to answer your question, to peacefully end resistance to this direction, we offer people a choice. To either live sustainably, and if you don't want to, then go off and create your own system.

As far as I'm concerned, the economy is on a collision course with collapse. And there's no amount of reforms that is gonna halt it. Our economy is one big pyramid scheme and its reaching its ultimate tipping point. You know, if you don't believe me, go and research what's known as "fractional reserve banking", which every bank in the world uses. There's a very interesting document released by the federal reserve bank in Chicago called "Modern Money Mechanics" which explains it fully. Just type "Modern Money Mechanics" into a search engine and you should be able to download a pdf version of it. But back on point, at present, we have a majority of the population that is either completely unaware of the collapse and/or any viable solution to the monetary system, or, simply does not care. And this was completely intentional on the parts of the media by the way. In today's society, we are pumped full of fear and the promotion of intellectual laziness by the media and through society. Watch any documentary that is critical of the media in this respect and you'll see. Outfoxed being a very good example. We are also bombarded with what is known as "perceived obsolescense" when the things we own are made to appear redundant, or old or "unfashionable" as quickly as possible by means of advertisements and the status orientation that certain "new" goods have as opposed to sticking with the "old" ones, irregardless of whether they still work or not. It doesn't matter if it still works perfectly fine, if it is not the latest model, then it has to go. Not owning up to date products is erroneously associated with a lower material and social status. So as a result, in order to allay that fear of ostricisation, and avoid the formality of being considered less than we are, we have to go out and keep shopping, and consuming and replacing. When you combine a dominant air of fear with a dominant air of rampant consumerism and materialism, the idea of looking outside the dominant frame of reference becomes a concept that is difficult, if not impossible for people to have time for, let alone fathom.

People seem to be quite cozy in their little bubble. But bubbles in the other definition are one of the things that is gonna bring down the structure of financial civilisation as we know it. There is only one thing that has the potential to wake up billions of docile, materialistic, apathetic consumers. And that is the complete, economic, ecological and geostrategic collapse of the planet Earth. And this collapse is what we are flat out sprinting towards. Remember the runaway train analogy that I used in my Dispelling Myths podcast? If you haven't heard it I would recommend it. Even if you have I suggest you go back and listen to that again, coz that is our reality now. I also suggest you look up a man named Michael Ruppert and take in some of the information he has on offer. I don't personally completely agree with all his predictions, but he has a lot of interesting and insightful information.

The change in economic paradigm will we very similar to, say a change in commuting habits. Say for example you spend 2 hours everyday walking to work, then 2 hours walking back home, but then you acquire a car and it only takes 20 minutes.

As the economic situation becomes more and more dire, the public will become more and more dissatisfied with the ever-growing disparity.

For one thing this isn't actually a case of convincing polititians of anything. It's the public who are our target demographic coz its the public who have the real power here, coz we have greater numbers. Besides, even when it comes to the elites, they will not be giving anything up. Every human being on the planet they will be GAINING a standard of living that exceeds even the lofty lifestyles that the rich and powerful enjoy.

I have taken great care and time to answer this in my previous Q&A shows. I can provide the answers people ask for, the formality I'm aware of is the fact that it is impossible to convince someone who does not want to see the validity and feasibility of an RBE, to see the validity and feasability of an RBE.

This is the point that I'm making. If you project into this idea, you are gonna contaminate your perception of it, and hense, to use a colloquial term, you ain't gonna get it.

This works with anything. So as I have said, I can provide the answers to your questions, however your choice to accept them or not, is contingent more upon your own personal will to recognise feasibility, or not. It is impossible to convince someone of this if they don't wanna know, THAT is why I don't bother with those closed-minded individuals anymore.

As for the “transition plan” part of your question, as I have stated in previous podcasts, none of us are prophets. And as such, none of us can lay out a concrete transition plan. We have to do this sort of thing on the fly as it were. If you wish for a concrete transition plan to be laid down and stringently followed, you’re gonna be disappointed.

Also if you care enough, Peter Joseph has done a radio lecture called "The Transition". I feel this information is good enough to spark your own research.

What is your evidence for this?



I do not get annoyed when people choose not to be "convinced". It is not my job to "onvince"anyone. It is THEIR OWN responsibility.



So you're saying that a good enough "salesmanship" can turn around someone who is convinced that an RBE is unrealistic? Don't make me laugh. Our conditioning doesn't allow for that. Instead we are taught to hold unchanging views and dogmatically hold onto them. Coz afterall, to be wrong means, you're inferior, right?

As such, that is why individuals such as yourself still aren't "convinced". Because you don't want to be "convinced".



Instead of demanding a "transition plan" of us, howabout you get off your ass and start something yourself? People like you continualkly sit there and criticise those who wish to improve things, but when we hold you accountable for what you're doing, you get all defensive. Howabout you STOP asking for what we are doing and start doing things.

Or are you afraid to?



Without education, can you go into an operating theatre and start performing heart surgery? No, I didn't think so either.



Then I'm sorry to disappoint you, but TZM has already come to fruition. It has existed since late 2008.



Considering your bias, are you AT ALL SUPRISED that you can't see any progress? Convincing you that an RBE is possible is like convincing an evangelical christian that there is no god. Think about it.

History. When things get rough (as they are getting now) there are competing narratives for what should be the way out. Globally, the strongest competing narrative is religion. People won't naturaly gravitate to this in the event of economic collapse. The far stronger narratives are evangelical christianity and fundamentalist islam. If TZM wants to turn people away from those narratives as a way out of collapse, it will really have to try harder.





No. Nobody has a responsibility to convince themselves that TZM is a good idea. However, proponents of TZM do have a motivation. If you wait around for people to convince themselves, you wait in vain.





You couldn't turn around me. I have seen absolutely no good arguments for how this could be done if it were a good idea and several good arguments for why it's a bad idea. If you want to do salesmanship with people who require rigorous arguments (I am already lost to you), you will need rigorous arguments. Those have not been forthcoming. If you want to turn your attention to people who don't require rigorous arguments, you are competing with other emotionally charged and considerably stronger narratives such as religion and anti-technology sentiments. Very strong salesmanship will be needed to convince people TZM is better than those. And if you stick by the conviction that people have a responsibility to convince themselves, TZM remains nothing but a few websites and some posts and podcasts.



Very true. I don't. I am a rationalist so I do not look for various fringe movements to convince me of things. One fringe movement (Paleo) has convinced me because of the reams of rational arguments they have. (It is not an economic system so I won't discuss it, but it is fringe.) I was not trying to be convinced. Their arguments convinced me. However, many people are not rationalists. They prefer appeals to emotion. They gravitate to religion. The world contains many rationalists who require rigorous arguments, and emotionalists (or whatever) who will prefer religion. Who does that leave you? Blue sky-ers? Yes. Blue sky-ers don't require either rigorous arguments or emotional things such as religion (and quasi-religious movements). But then you have all the other blue sky mini-memes to compete with. So who exactly do you think is going to get on board with this? TZM hasn't brought anything to the table but a few websites.





Because I don't want TZM to happen. Therefore I will not help it happen.



I will not work towards something I don't want to happen.





This is why people who want to be heart surgeons get the education. People who want TZM to happen will indeed visit those websites. However, the people who want TZM appears to be vanishingly small. This will not change unless the people who already want TZM convince them that they should want it too. As long as almost nobody else wants it, it won;t happen. So far you are not being an effective ambassador to convince people to want it.





There are some websites and some podcasts. If that's all you wanted, then I guess it is Misssion Accomplished. But if you actually want an RBE (which I don't), you aren't doing a good job convincing other people that they should all join in to make one.





That's a good analogy. So you see what you are up against. The people who absolutely will never be convinced this is a good idea (you can certainly count evangelical christians among them) outnumber the people who favor it by a gigantic margin. I am not unique. Other people will put up a fight considerably more vigorous than mine. People aren't going to naturally gravitate to this if/when there is an economic collapse. They will gravitate to the stronger narravtives.

I think RBS sounds like a great idea. Sounds like utopia. But I reckon humanity is not intelligent enough to pull it off yet (or at least those in charge are not intelligent enough yet).

Just to make something clear, this is my last response to you, since due to your beligerence, addressing you is a waste of time. You have already admitted your ignorance about it and your refusal to look into it. You can try and throw those cowardice accusations all you like. The fact of the matter is discussing this with someone like you who has repeatedly expressed a refusal and in fact outright ignorance is a waste of both of our time.

The reason why force has never been successful in its aims to bring about true lasting positive change for all humanity should be self-evident. It has been used every single time before, and look where it has got us. That is one of the main reasons TZM does not advocate force or coersion to achieve a better future.



They do if they want to understand it. Therin ies the beauty of being your own mind and your own leader.



Well I do apologise that none of us in TZM are gonna come to your house with guns or tazer you or douse you with pepperspray. We just realise that is not how you get in people's good books for the most basic level of compassion.

I do apologise that TZM will not force its ideas upon you and give you the choice to look into it or not. It is up to society whether they want a better future, and if they are prepared to do their own thinking to realise it for themselves.



And you have given no indication as to what would qualify in the respect of what would "convince" you, which is convenient, and no evidence to why it is a bad idea.



Then why are you STILL replying?



How so?



You obviously think that I'm the world's only proponent of TZM. *giggles*. Your attempt at downplaying what TZM does is amusing.



Well, in that case, state your bar of acceptability of an argument. However since you have already repeatedly stated that you don't want to be "convinced", your repeated posts here are pretty futile and a waste of yours and our time. In fact, its a testament to something else about your mindset. Maybe you like trying to embarrass people or show them up. It certainly isn't to learn anything. It is possibly about an ego-driven pursuit of superiority.



TZM has already happened. But did I say that you should do something to bring about an RBE? No. I'm asking you to start practising what you preach and put what you feel is the better solution for infinite growth on a finite planet into action.



You don't want a better world? You wanna keep consuming until there is nothing left to consume? Go fill your boots mate.



So who are you to say they shouldn't? Because you don't?



Please, if you're gonna make this kinda statement, a credible source would be helpful. Otherwise you look rather silly.



Like I have said, it is not up to me to "change" anyone's minds. Ambassador? You're funny. I'm no ambassador. Nor do I wish to be one. I'm just a human.

Would you prefer that I act in the firebrand, preacher manner? Telling people they are bound to oblivion unless they convert? I'm sorry, but I don't condascend to people that way. I have no ego about this. People have to become their own leaders and make up their own minds.



I think there's a liiiiiiittle bit more than that.



I suppose if you compare 1 man on a forum for autistic people trying to rationalise with people who have already made up their unchanging minds, to the successes myself and other activists have when actually engaging OPEN minds about this, you will see the reality of the situation. However you don't care about what successes TZM has, so you wouldn't be privvy to them, would you? Therefore reinforcing your beligerent assertion that TZM is unsuccessful because you knowingly and willfully REFUSE to see anything else.



You seem to forget that we are creatures of conditioning. We LEARN the things we believe, just as easily as we can UNLEARN them, or learn new things. Its all in allowing the human mind to operate under its own steam as opposed to external control from indoctrination.



Of course you're unique. Don't count yourself as simply nothing more than a part of a larger whole. You are a human being. Therefore you are better than that.



I respectfully disagree. I know because economic suffering is what triggered my OWN search for something different. An RBE is the end result of such research.

Just to reinforce the assertion, I have had about enough of responding to you Janissy. You have already stated your refusal to even consider what you repeatedly argue about so there's no point in addressing you anymore. You can try all you like yto try the futile accusation that I am "running away", however to stay in this ridiculous circular argument with you is not doing either of us any favours. You are not beniffiting, and I am not either. So lets just go our separate ways, yea?

Last edited by Adam-Anti-Um on 23 Dec 2011, 6:06 pm, edited 3 times in total.

RBS is the Royal Bank of Scotland. Among other things. I think you mean an RBE. Resource-Based Economy.

I appreciate your consideration of this. Its good to know there are some on here who are actually receptive and thibnk for themselves in an open manner. One thing I should correct you on though, is that "utopia" refers to a fixed end state of perfection. However this is impossible. We live in an emergent universe, meaning that everything from the movements of the cosmic bodies, to human thoughts and understandings are in constant transition. Perfection is impossible to attain because everything is always changing. Therefore there is no such thing as a "utopia".

You are absolutely right though. We as a species, are definately not intelligent enough for this yet. As George Carlin said:

"We are barely out of the jungle on this planet"

However we have shown great potential as a species. We have the capability to grow to that next altruistic level. We just won't be able to get there with all the evolutionary baggage that we cling onto. We gotta let that stuff go, coz when we think about it, it serves no purpose anymore.

I find this remark of yours above about that movie never meant to lead anyone to anything quite dishonest. If the point of the movie was just to be an artistic expression, why spread what are clearly lies and misleading information? I saw that PDF guide. It doesn't look like it's saying it's just an artistic expression.

One reason why the Zeitgeist Movement can't be trusted is because of that movie. When I see you guys denounce that movie and point out to all that it is full of lies and that the movement made some errors with that movie, then I'll start taking you guys more seriously.

For me, intellectual integrity matters quite a lot.

I'm disappointed that you would pursue such a redundant, desperate, futile, childish and OLD argument.

Dishonest because it is dishonest, or dishonest because you are frustrated that you are weilding a doomed argument? I don't spread Zeitgeist: The Movie. It has no solutions. It is actually completely irrelevant to how we make this world a better place.

So where does this film lead people exactly? It certainly didn't lead me anywhere besides more books and articles to learn more.

Hell, I wouldn't even refer anyone to the recent 2 Zeitgeist films for a true angle on what TZM proposes. The Zeitgeist films are Peter Joseph's creation. Peter Joseph uploaded a source guide PRECISELY for the reason that it was being attacked for it's "innacuracies". Even an artistic expression can have a bibliography.



The film was made before Peter Joseph ever heard of The Venus Project, ever started advocating the direction and hense before TZM even existed. How difficult is that to understand? You're not the first to desperately imply a link between TZM and the first film and unfortunately you won't be the last. So take a number and consider yourself among the queue of the desperate straw-clutchers. lol



How can TZM denounce a film that they didn't even make? Is it even representative of what TZM advocates? Where is the mention of a Resource-Based Economy in Zeitgeist: The Movie?.......... Oh yea, I remember, NOWHERE.

You can't even start to say exactly what "lies" are in the film coz you have nothing to back that assertion up. Tell you what, when YOU denounce your argument that Zeitgeist: The Movie has anything to do with TZM, point out you made some errors in your thinking, then I'll take YOU seriously.

If you have a problem with Zeitgeist: The Movie, take it up with Peter Joseph. The man who made it a year before he met the man who would inspire the creation of a global grassroots movement to shift humanity in a saner direction. (TZM)



Strange, since you lack it completely.

I think you find it as such because it hasn't been satisfyingly answered by any Zeitgeist fan as of yet. That's why we'll keep making this argument until we get a clear and honest answer.



But you sure don't denounce it, do you? Saying "it has no solutions" could be interpreted as saying "it has facts in it backed up with lots of evidence but it provides no solutions anyway". I'm not satisfied with you just saying "it has no solutions". I want you to tell us it's full of errors and a lot of the claims it makes lacks the needed evidence.

So let me hear you say it.



Still no denunciation of the movie itself.



You put "inaccuracies" between quotes, indicating that you don't believe the movies are full of s**t (or at least the first one).



This is not straw-clutching. This is me waiting for you to actually say the first movie was full of crap. You said a long time ago you weren't a conspiracy theorist. So let's see you denounce the movie once and for all.



Why haven't you denounced that movie yet, Adam? If there's no link at all, and you're not a conspiracy theorist, what are you afraid of then?



I have argued against many of the claims made in that movie in various threads. Denounce the movie and I'll do my own denouncing for your satisfaction.



But my problem for now is with you refusing to speak against it. Are you a supporter of the first Zeitgeist movie?



I find it interesting that you didn't make it clear that you actually had intellectual integrity (contrary to what I implied).

How is this any different from Marxism but with different words?

it lacks any strategy whatsoever for implementation, other than to say they will be using "complex statistical systems".

and the ultimate goal of this movement involves a team of benevolent computers and engineers making all of our decisions for us.

so while there are (although adam disagrees without exactly explaining why), on the surface, similarities to marxism, the final outcome sounds something more akin to technocratic totalitarianism than pure communism.

Last edited by peebo on 24 Dec 2011, 2:12 am, edited 1 time in total.