Zeitgeist Reloaded
Thomas Lloyd-Evans
Zeitgeist: The Movie
successfully challenged customary assumptions about democracy and religion, and resonated with the fears and dreams of millions of viewers. The sequel, Zeitgeist: Addendum,
explores the corruption of our globalized monetary system, and considers how we might effect a transition from a society of scarcity and profiteering, to one of sustainability and abundance.
The film opens with a concise analysis of the monetary system, explaining how money is debt, and how debt is used as a subtle tool by an unelected "corporatocracy" to enslave the populace within the system. "Economic hitman" John Perkins describes how various reformist political leaders of developing nations worldwide have been overthrown or assassinated when they have attempted to withstand the global ambitions of this corporatocracy.
Suggesting that human behaviour is environmentally conditioned, the film argues that our current egocentric, profit oriented environment nurtures unthinking nihilistic consumers, who struggle to envisage any alternative to the status quo.
Zeitgeist: Addendum concludes by taking us on an inspirational tour of a world that might yet come into being, if we can move beyond our paralyzing profit structure, and the elite that manipulate it. The technology to create a truly egalitarian planetary civilization of sustainable abundance already exists. What is needed is the will, the courage and the opportunity to apply it.
- Thomas Lloyd-Evans's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- Printer-friendly version
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Propeller
Reddit
Magnoliacom
Newsvine
Furl
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
Icerocket
I liked it
Message of Hope
The wake up
call that noone is answering. I say noone but I don't mean everyone. Let's keep willing the transformation people. The evil hegemony has vast material power, however I am fairly certain they are running a karmic deficit. We got this shit! Much love to my friends reading this and my enemies peering through spyware.
The weight of the preceding suject matter demands two quotes.
A complacency with present knowledge is the chief bar to the pursuit of knowledge. - B. H. Liddell
Rebellion, though apparently negative, since it creates nothing, is profoundly positive in that it reveals the part of the man which must always be defended. - Albert Camus
Zeitgeist Addendum
If you feel compelled to
If you feel compelled to make your own film about societal transformation, then I say "way to go!" Anything that we can do to increase awareness and inspire thought about these important topics is a step in the right direction. Plus, I'm sure any such film would be well-received here on Reality Sandwich, one of the many reasons I love this online community! So you have my encouragement. :)
Much love to you all.
Zeitgeist Reloaded
Although the critique of the monetary and banking systems is very accurate and should be known to every citizen in the modern world.....I disagree with what is essentially a transhumanist proposition....I do not think that technology has all the answers.....I just finished reading this excellent and informative book on the 'father' of cybernetics Dark Hero of the Information Age: In Search of Norbert Weiner by Flo Conway and Jim Siegelman. Weiner was also pessimistic with regards to technology
mind blowing
Something hidden
The Lucifer Project?
Zeitgeist does a good job explaining and criticizing the pyramid power structure of the world. Zeitgeist is suggesting the venus project as the solution for a sustainable human future. Could it be that the venus project and the NWO are interchangeable? Venus is also known as the morning star, the morning star is associated with Lucifer. Heads up, Zeitgeist is tricky.
Exactly!
Zeitgeist should stick to the secular. Their take on spirituality and archetypal incarnation patterns is to throw it all out... but...
Francis Bacon, who wrote Shakespeare, was born of the "virgin" Elizabeth and forced to prosecute his rebellious brother Essex. Fits Christ archetype. Humbly concealed himself in his many creations (Don Quixote, Anatomy of Melancholy, The Labyrinth of the World and the Paradise of the Heart, Rosicrucian manifestos, and many others), very godlike.
Jerry Garcia, who was Elijah and John the Baptist, also Herman Melville, is the celestial intelligence of Leo. He was followed by Phish, which is the symbol of Who again? "Why'd you send my monkey on the train?"
Fire and water. This is alluded to in Matthew17, which deals with the Transfiguration. The disciples ask him, why must Elijah come first? Then there is an oblique reference "often he falls into fire, often into water." Alchemy.
Western society is called Faustian because we have traded God for gadgets. It has not worked out very well. Zeitgeist criticizes capitalism, rightly so, but...
IT IS VERY ARROGANT TO LOOK AT THE TEMPLES AND CATHEDRALS AND ASSUME THAT THEY WERE ALL BUILT BY DELUDED FOOLS.
Zeitgeist is very luciferian. No God, no objective truth... can they really assert that truth is always emergent? The books of today are a joke compared to the books of the past, same with art. And can you relly imagine Krishnamurti signing on to the idea that technology is the answer to all our problems?
Krishnamurti's ghost
to answer your question: i would say no. he might say that we've just traded one idol of our making for another.
or perhaps that's just me saying that...but then krishnamurti might say that me saying that is just as important as him saying that...or you saying that...or someone else saying that.
perhaps instead of debating whose view of the future is correct (or whether the art of which past is superior), we should create the future individually collectively within the present moment.
p.s. although i would personally agree with you about the art, i've seen some really amazing work lately that has forced my tacit agreement into question.
Misconceptions of God
Here's a thought: God is not a concept that will ever fit into our minds. However we describe it, we will be omitting something.
Religion describes God and therefore pushes an incomplete by definition concept as a replacement of an authentic experience.
And that's for every description, every religion.
In contrast, a spiritual teacher brings a seeker to experiences, so that the seeker may make first hand discoveries, beyond concepts and words.
When we are present to God, we don't need to and know we can't discuss it. When we are not present to God, we do not know God, as we can only know an incomplete/false concept.
Ironic, no?
Your concept says: "...accept the fact we don't know everything, nor will we ever know everything, and we ourselves are not GOD"
My concept says "God's attention identifies with a phenomenon called mind that exists only through separation. As long as God identify with this phenomenon of separation, by Our omnipotent nature, We truly become separate from God." (grammar intentionally off)
Both are concepts, both are false. You and I, we will not think yourself into Paradise nor Samadhi, quite the opposite!
What to do?
Hugs,
Andre
Critique of the Film
It's hard to be critical of this film because there is so much quality information and ideas in it, but the messages at the end were sometimes disturbing.
If we allow ourselves to forget what 'money' actually is, then it's our fate to be controlled by those who do. Money is a candidate (up there with fire and the wheel) for the greatest technology man has ever invented, and it's more beneficial and essential than electrical cars, or mag-lev trains. It's a technology for trade. It means that we can form a system based on trust and mutual cooperation, where you can specialize and something you are good at (art, science) and trade easily with anyone else who uses the money. ANY TECHNOLOGY which allows someone to do this, whether it be gold nuggets, wampum, or fiat paper currency might be called a 'monetary system'. This film doesn't bother going into this, but instead declares free market capitalism and money to be evil. We are shown the reality of the federal reserve and the IMF, and then meant to equate this behaviour as a a result of "greedy free market capitalism", when in fact this is the operation of a cartel, the very thing that Adam Smith hated and spoke bitterly against.
So I wonder, how is it going to work, this classless, moneyless society? What system decides how the goods and services are distributed? That is the more important question, which this movie skips around. I don't see how such a system wouldn't evolve into another utopian dictatorship, with an elite group of 'guardians' at the top. If we outlawed money, it would be like outlawing liquor, and a massive black market with new forms of money would form (unless we had a really effective police state). In Jail money can be a can of mackerel. In Post-WWII Germany money was cigarettes. How do you outlaw that?
I do think the movie is correct in it's assessment of what technology can do for humanity. I think that truly free, open-source and peer-to-peer technology is already in the process of revolutionizing the planet. If we could manage to free ourselves from cartels and large monopolistic corporations (which are not 'free market' but actually under special government protection and corporate welfare), we might realistically achieve these goals. The only difference is we could achieve them not by taking other people's property but by obsoleting it. As the movie says, unleashing an engine of mass creation. The free market is such an engine. So too is the truly FREE market of open-source, collective and VOLUNTARY creation.
We could probably also build a 'cashless' or 'moneyless' society far superior to our own, if we put our heads together and fought for it, but you still need some system that allows for trade. Considering where we're at, merely going back to silver and gold would be a revolution in itself. In the end, even if it is pure information, even if it is not measurable or quantified, it is good as gold, as long as it is a reliable way to trade.
A quote from the movie: "The most important issue at hand is the intelligent management of the earth's resources. This can never be accomplished in a monetary system, for the pursuit of profit is the pursuit of self-interest, and imbalance in inherent."
There are several things wrong with a statement like this. It assumes that profit is merely pursuit of self-interest. Not so, because you can easily be altruistic and profit from it (for example a band puts its music for free on the web, then profits when people come to see them live). Does this imply that in order to operate in a 'balanced' system, we have to act against our self-interest? In other words, sacrifice ourselves for the greater good and work like slaves?
Some people 'profit' in a non-monetary way, for example we might profit socially from doing volunteer work. Are they bad people? No, and they are capitalist as well, trading in the world of human capital, only their transactions are not registered in our current system.
In fact, a system of sound currency is inherently stable, whereas a system of fiat currency is inherently unstable, more becuase the fiat currency unleashes more of the "greed" aspect of profits by enabling people to profit from doing essentially nothing. Whereas if you are forced to do something for someone else in order to get the benefit of what they do or make, that encourages co-operation, symbiosis and general oneness because in order to trade with one another you need to trust and depend on one another.
I'll end my rant now.
Hmmn
Reply to stephen.
"everyone gives what is wanted and needed to whoever wants and needs it"-
How is that not communism? How will we decide who needs what and who wants what, and who "gives"? I need a butler. Who is going to volunteer to be my butler? You? What, am I going to get a robo-butler?
If you answer that if I want more luxuries, then I must give more back to the system, WELL THEN THAT IS MONEY.
How can this be done on a volunteer basis? With a "consciousness" change? It's Utopian to think that suddenly everyone in the world is going to simultaneously drop everything and go along with this plan. Not going to happen, not without some pretty serious mind control or re-imprinting.
Again, we can have a free economy or one that funtions on a gift basis, but only in the realm of information at first. Since information is capable of structuring the material world, It may eventually grow into something that significantly improves our quality of live (materially). It's a natural outgrowth of money and free enterprise, and can only blossom in the presence of a healthy functioning economy, not a planned utopian nightmare.
no butler for you.
entangled roots? is that you?
the venus project reminded me of trotskyite communism, where the state, theoretically, withers away and all that remains is an infrastructure of benign technicians. human beings then begin to behave with all the well-oiled rationality of automatons. that old couple kind of creeped me out.
i think the basis of a volunteer society is not to be found in any 'plan' but in the commitment of individuals to struggle together to make it happen. the journey as destination.
it is stretching the analogy very thin to say that one who volunteers her time and energy and receives something back on an emotional or spiritual level is a 'capitalist' or is engaging in 'exchange'. love is not capital & is not quantifiable. if it can't be bought, sold or bartered, then its got nothing to do with capitalism. I would say, the less we buy and sell, & the more we freely give, the better. a consciousness change will not happen over night, but that doesn't mean it won't happen at all.
also, what do you need a butler for? why should we be concerned about your desire for a butler? my reply is not 'put more into the system', it is 'do your own damn chores'.
Reply to Devon
"it is stretching the analogy very thin to say that one who volunteers her time and energy and receives something back on an emotional or spiritual level is a 'capitalist' or is engaging in 'exchange'. love is not capital & is not quantifiable."
-Love is Human Capital. It is a form of stored energy and bonding (technology and information are also forms of Capital). And when we have more of it, we are richer. I never said it could really be 'quantified'. The energy exchanges which occur in any ecosystem are not "quantifiable" perhaps but they are also forms of stored energy and operate the same way as our economy does (because we are just another ecosystem). Monetary valuations are just approximations, and there is no absolute 'price' for any form of capital since our valuations are subjective in the end.
It is the habit of our particular form of virulent, consumerist, crony Capitalism to attempt to turn abundancies into scarcities (enclosing the commons, forming monopolies) in order to turn a profit. I agree with the movie that this is probably a source of much bad conditioning. Unfortunately, scarcity is a physical reality that we can't really wipe away so easily (at least the movie offers no solution), but nevertheless no form of scarcity is absolute. Technology (Capital) has made a lot of progress at reducing scarcity so far, for instance mass-produced goods have reduced scarcity and in turn made us materially richer. It has also caused us to run up against certain ecological limits. Perhaps with a 'consciousness change', we can learn to rely on information-based wealth (which is naturally abundant, not scarce, since it is enhanced by being copied). That way we can reverse the trend of abundancies being turned into scarcities, using the power of collective capital, or capital that is bound up in the community. At the same time that would reduce our ecological load. If you have trouble envisioning this, just think about how with more information and skills, you can do more with less material resources. Think electronics, not paper. Virtual spaces, not real spaces. Virtual transport, not motorized. Because information interacts and combines with material goods, the material world will then be infused with the properties of the informational world. That is evolution!
"I would say, the less we buy and sell, & the more we freely give, the better. a consciousness change will not happen over night, but that doesn't mean it won't happen at all"
-I agree that the more we freely give, the better... as long as we are truly giving it freely and as long as it is in a healthy, balanced way. But at the same time trading fairly is a step above fraud, theft and slavery.
And I certainly do believe our consciousness is changing at an accelerating rate. Possibly it will even reach some tipping point (our technology/capital is also accelerating). And it's everyone's best interest to support any sort of decentralization of power, including the free market, peer-to-peer technology, DIY, gun ownership, Organic farming, the Web, direct democracy, swarm intelligence, community currencies, etc.
Thanks for reading!
love is not capital.
"Love is Human Capital. It is a form of stored energy and bonding (technology and information are also forms of Capital)."
I would reject this idea on principle, if only because of your use of the word 'stored'. Love cannot be stored. Love increases only when it is given, like the Beatles song. Accumulation is at the root of the problem here. Scarcity is simultaneously created and (partially - i mean, seriously a sixth of the world population is literally starving to death, and 99% of us live in a cycle of perpetual debt to the other 1%) assuaged by capitalism. It is created first as a philosophical concept - capitalism requires a belief in scarcity as its philosophical underpinning - and then is reproduced in reality. Our broke asses are then put to work post haste.
i actually think that the commons of the virtual world is equally as applicable to the material world. wealth, like information, like love, is only increased by being shared. that is why i prefer a communalism or mutualism to the idealized free market that never seems to really exist.
I am down with the rest of your ideas about decentralization of power, although the gun and free market obsession of libertarians of your ilk is a bit weird to me. I have discovered that there is no use arguing that point, though. I suppose if we ever had the opportunity to let these ideas rise and fall on their own merits instead of having them propped up by the violence of the state, we would see who was right after all. probably it is some variation of 'both-and', not 'either-or'.
peace, D
www.myspace.com/thedeclineofthewest
Love is Capital?
It's probably my bad choice of words, but I didn't mean that love was something that scarcity applies to. Precisely why consumer capitalism (the realm of scarcity) spends so much efforts trying to colonize and conquer it (have they partially succeeded?)
Information also increases only when given, and it is also a form of Capital. Yet it is also stored, in hard drives, on paper. Human skills are also Capital. So why is it hard to see love as Capital? It is stored, in relationships, in families, in populations. It is very difficult to buy or sell (not impossible), but that is not to say that it does not translate into wealth (married couples are statistically wealthier). But wealth doesn't even have to be monetary. Love is wealth in itself, if we value and desire it.
You made a good point about how Capitalism simultaneously creates and restricts abundance. Peter Joseph (who made the movie) might say that it was technology, not Capitalism that created this abundance. I say it is a mixture of both.
But I disagree with you that the properties of the information world hold true in the material world. Not all wealth increases by being shared, for instance land. Even if you don't have a concept of land ownership, people still use it and not everyone can use it at once (also goes for food, tools, etc). Furthermore, as our mass produced goods become more abundant due to our technology, we also consume natural resources and pollute the environment at an increased rate. I guess that's why they want a carbon tax, to create artificial scarcity as a good thing! What we really need to do is merge the two. This way truly free information and designs can be supported by an underlying free market; for example the band that gives free music on internet, but charges for concerts. Or free software, but people sell services connected to it. What if we had a system where we had open source design, but paid businesses to merely assemble the products (or even mini-factories owned by the individual, like a PC printer)? It would be cheaper for the businesses because they wouldn't be paying designers, and people would prefer the open source because of the innate superiority of collective design (product of hundreds of minds) and public interests built into it (say goodbye to planned obsolesence).
And yes, the gun and private property (or some version of property rights that is above the power of the state, even if you have communal ownership of some land and resources) are essential to decentralization of power. I'm not even your typical libertarian, I'm just somebody who's exposed to many reality-tunnels and I've found my own particular synthesis.
genius
" Peter Joseph might say that it was technology, not Capitalism that created this abundance. I say it is a mixture of both."
I say it was neither. It was Genius, or the human spirit, or whatever you want to call it. Like love, genius can't be stored or contained. It wants to spill out all over the place. I think wealth could be that way, too, if we turned our attentions away from acquisition and toward genius. Its possible. I think your ideas about free information etc are all good. I just think, as long as we're dreaming, why not dream BIG?
(all these things, skills, information, affections, are only 'capital' if you choose to frame the world that way. they might be more accurately described as gifts, or even miracles of creation. who owns those?)
Harnessing the Human Spirit
yes...
CT for Dummies
It takes money to not need money
something to dye for...
The answer you seek...
Excellent review of the history and nature of the monetary system, and a nice Epcot Center type look into a possible future. I would have appreciated it more if the part III propaganda had been removed entirely. Mostly because, without a sea change in consciousness (admitted at the very end of the movie), it is entirely unrealistic given the current obsolete state of world consciousness. As Einstein described, attempting to institute such a utopian ideal, without such a change in consciousness, would be an act of insanity.
As the movie later stated “The first relevant change” would have to be a “revolution of consciousness”. I’m sure their choice of the word ‘revolution’ was intentional given the admonition to the public to remove support from the current system by their six-step (was it six?) charge to action.
There is no argument that consensus consciousness is obsolete, and that any notion of continuing the status quo is irrelevant. However, I doubt that the change in consciousness necessary to move humanity forward will be 'revolutionary'. I believe it will be evolutionary. There is a fundamental difference. When the coming evolutionary change in consciousness occurs, even the most astute formulations now being generated to improve our reality will seem silly.
Change is surely coming, but not in the way most think.
In fact, the closing scenes of the movie suggest what I am saying.
"everything means something"
disagree
deny what?
haha
Opinion
Apparently im entitled to one. Freedom is a two edged sword! I perceived the ideas slightly different from you . Is there something wrong with that? i personally dont think this new age Techno-cratic utopia is the direction of which we need to be pushing things. By all means if you wanna live in this new world of 60's sci-fi aesthetic join the zeitgeist movement!
and now ill move along
Just asking
I moved on
ridiculous!
han shan
They ask us to throw the spiritual baby out with the religious bath water and then tell us to replace it with (drum roll, please) TECHNOLOGY! This kind of Newtonian age of reason clap trap is what got us into this mess in the first place.
Mag-Lev trains tunnels running all over the world and robots that do all our work for us? There simply aren't enough resources for such a thing unless you killed off three quarters of the world's population. Haven't you ever heard of PEAK OIL or CLIMATE CHANGE?
It's not to say I don't think there are technological answers to the problems we face, but they would be low intensity, not a lot of silicone and precious metals. Permaculture is a good place to start and the earth ships housing model is pretty inspiring and both are being done NOW. Look it up on youtube and then go READ about it. (A message for the post-literates)
The most important technological innovation of the future will be the adaptation of the most complex technology in the universe-the human brain. The consciousness game is the only game in town.
think greek and not the butt kind...
great
unaware
The film suggests that the proceeding moment of evolution will come from a place that we are all unaware of.
As ridiculous as facts and analysis may prove against them, I feel the ideas of the Zeitgeist filmmakers and The Venus Project are extraordinarily in the direction of where "dreams of the future" need to be. Invite an idea that is un-understandable.
"You have tasted death now," said the Old Man. "Is it good?"
"It is good," Mossy replied. "It is better than life."
"No... only more life."
maybe confusing or contradicting
it's from "The Golden Key"
it's from "The Golden Key" by George MacDonald.
"You have tasted death now," said the Old Man. "Is it good?"
"It is good," Mossy replied. "It is better than life."
"No... only more life."
accessing...accessing...
the Zeitgeist
being the theme word to present this movies view of the human all too human situation.Speaking of the system that is like a huge machine that runs on money and feeds on flesh.The machine is called GOD.You can put all the history books in there somewhere, all the revolutions, and wars fought over this God machine.We are presented with a picture of this machine, and then shown a direction toward a better way out of this conveyor belt to nowhere.
Now we perhaps could take a longer look at the meaning of zeitgeist.Called spirit of the times, that goes around and comes around.Do we then see how the linear view of things is a narrow tunnel vision that has been made into the only view, where as we once saw the forest for the trees, in that all this technology is a very recent development in the whole sense of our journey out of the past.Humankind has always been guided by the spirit of the time, but we also have been misled by the illusion of history.This reality has always been present and has been shaping and moving this whole affair along through each shift and speed bump.The zeitgeist is like the UFO or the unidentified unknown object at the beginning of time at all the ticks and tocks of time and at the end of time.Which is again like the mechanical view of the world that is still projecting the image of who we are on the screen of who we will be.While the zeitgeist hovers over all this changing shapes and signs.
A few questions....
I was very interested in the first two thirds of the film, the last part I am left with some questions about.
1. It seems to me that by removing religion you will be replacing it with an ego-centered religion based on the individual becoming their own God. . . How will this be better then what we have had for religion in the past?
2. What about the people who do not want to give up their religions, will they be given the same freedoms as everyone else?
3. Why does everything need to be furthering technology? Why not try going back to the land and ridding ourselves of technology? (I personally would never want a machine to opperate on me.)What if I want to work? How will this be removing laziness?
4. What about the absence of rules? I got the impression from the film that there would no longer be a need for rules. By removing money are you saying that this would be removing all evil from the world? You said that there would be no threat of a drunk driver because there vehicle wouldnt be able to hit another one...shouldnt this system rid the need to get that drunk in the first place? baby proofing the world is an interesting idea but it doesnt remove human evil. Are you proposing to remove all things that could be used as weapons so that no one can murder?
5. Will poeple be shuned or excommunicated from this world if they choose not to want to live this way?
6. When the world bank collapses instead of currency are you proposing that every one recieves a number? or a chip? (the technology for that is already in existence)
7. By running a train that is capable of travelling 4000 ml/hr won't this be moving the world in a direction that will be removing all races and creating one race with one language? Hasn't the world in the past always used our culture and individuality as races, languages and religions to be creative? I am interested in the ideas proposed in your film, i don't agree with them all but I hope that in what you are proposing, there will always be freedom of speech. I would like to be furthering something that is positive for humanity, much different from the system that we have today. It is very exciting, to be on the threshold of something so different from anything that we have ever known.
If my questions could be answered by someone that would be great.
Upgrading Venus an open-source challenge!
I liked the first two-thirds of the film, and I found the last third seemed to get a little weird re: religion as well as empty on the subject of how to move to the next system from this one.
I personally believe that we need to decentralize power while also unifying the people with voice while respecting our individuality and freedom of belief. I also respect all the work and detail that went into alerting and informing us of these oppressions.
While I was reading through these comments a question was running through my head. It is one that the Venus Project seems to be working toward answering. It's a question Buckminster Fuller asked 3 decades ago:
"How do we make the world work for 100% of humanity in the shortest possible time through spontaneous cooperation without ecological damage or disadvantage to anyone?"
I really liked Bucky's approach, he was a man with tremendous genius, an absolutely visionary engineer and he posed his question as a "world game simulation".
In other words He open-sourced saving the world!
So in that spirit I ask:
What answers do we have that enhance the Venus Project?
Here are two to kick it off:
1 Sustainable Technology that encourages peace and population balance.
GENI: The Global Energy Network Institute has taken on Bucky's question and has some pretty compelling strategies to counter the old “divide and conquer” method. They have been working with the United Nations to hook up transatlantic cables to share energy around the world in one renewable resource energy grid. So if we bomb anyone we would lose energy, it would become more profitable to be at peace! They also site some interesting statistics: they find that nations that have available electricity do not overpopulate as quickly. This is very much related to resource based economy mentioned in the Venus project. A huge emphasis on global sharing and global thinking.
On www.geni.org
The benefits of this sustainable development world power solution are proven:
Decreased pollution from fossil and nuclear fuels
Reduced hunger and poverty in developing nations
Increased trade, cooperation and world peace
Stabilized population growth
2 A method of making efficient decisions together with consent. The proper utilization of this organizational method would help to bring about refinement to the Venus project development that enable it to more effectively handle differences of opinion (such as re religion)while still pooling the genius of people.
Can SOCIOCRACY offer another big piece of the solution to the world question? How about getting past our egos and selfishness to work together knowing that we have a voice and effectively consent while building the sustainable world together? We all have a piece of the puzzle.
On www.sociocracy.info/
Sociocracy is a method of governing organizations that produces more effective and harmonious decision-making in both businesses and associations. It ensures inclusiveness, accountability, and transparency while it increases productivity.
If we are going to bridge the divides in our humanity perpetuated by the divide and conquer strategy then we will require an elegantly simple and effective means of consensual pooling of our genius as a united humanity toward these larger issues.
What most governmental systems have failed to do so far is to find a way to come to consent without manipulating freewill, deadlock or causing panic. People tend to panic when they feel they have no voice and no power or resources to address the changes that they see before them. When people rise to the occasion to work together for something they can build bridges that heal the divides. Deadlock is ingeniously dealt with in the Sociocratic method by the way its process focussed attention on the bigger picture and taking care of non-divisive issues first.
The Perfect Plan
We can be perfect, we must strive to be perfect, and yes, one day many of us will be perfected. Our Creator is perfect, His creation is perfect, His adopted son is perfect and He challenges each of us to put on this perfection. Other religions also guide one towards this perfection. Were we to do away with our different religions, who would guide us, who would be the examples? Are better examples needed? Would not this be just another religion?
There is a religion that is not based on light and perfection. It operates in the shadows and hides from the light. Its goal is not perfection but corruption fueled by greed. Zeitgeist: Addendum exposes their agenda and methods beautifully.
A rock, a rose, a lady bug, and a cow are perfect in their creation. Not man though. He must be taught, i.e. programed. The myths of the past have performed this function. Is a new myth needed? Who will serve as the Priests of this Myth. Will they be perfected or only intelligent. Herein is my fear.
Would a different Priesthood behave differently?
I find solace in Prophecy. The prophecy that a new world is coming and perfection will be established. But first, this world must be cleansed and it will be by fire. All of man's institutions must fall. A beautiful prophetic example is in Ezekiel 7:19.
"They shall cast their silver in the streets and their gold shall be removed: their silver and their gold shall not be able to deliver them in the day of the wrath of Yahweh: they shall not satisfy their souls, neither fill their bowels: because it is the stumbling block of their iniquity."
It looks like the heat is being turned up. If the fire is hot enough maybe we'll be done by 2012. I sure hope so. The building blocks of this new society might be a little crisp, though.
What a deal! (What are we going to eat in the meantime?)
First off, I will say that I found the film to be insightful to sift through and not to swallow whole (particularly the last half.) The first two sections did put some areas of personal research into a more integrated perspective. However, I couldn't shake the feeling that I was being handed a new "plan of salvation."
I was surprised they didn't mention community gardening and sustainable agriculture as being vital to a more benign shift of consciousness. We are at the threshold of unprecedented technological advancements, yes, but if people don't have their own access to food, then how are we going to get from our current condition to a more harmonious way of life? Connecting to the land and to each other should be the basis of our society, and growing food with our neighbors can be a pragmatic route to tremendous social change. It may not be very fancy, but it meets very immediate needs. Well, that's my two cents.
Break on through to the Other Side . . .
Zeitgeist Addendum
We may have been had. Does anyone remember the interview with the founders of the Venus Project indicating that money must be eliminated? The Venus Project compound is for sale. See the link below:
http://www.seasteading.org/stay-in-touch/blog/3/2008/05/11/the-venus-pro...
Premature Speculation...
Has anyone talked to the Venus Project people to confirm that the land is for sale or why?
I find it rediculous to think that the venus project people are not going to work within the current monetary system that currently exists while building the new one. They suggest taking first steps not everyone abandoning money and sales today. They do suggest switching from the 3 top fed cartel banks Citybank, JP Morgan Chase and Bank of America.
They don't suggest getting out of all banks and all real estate right now.
They are going to need money to build a cashless cultural redesign. The world isn't going to go cold turkey into this. Anyone working toward really building sustainability will be faced with this problem. We will have to have a foot in both worlds. We will have to take baby steps toward this vision. How difficult the transition is depends on our ability to accept both the world we are in for what it is corporatocracy and all, as well as building the infrastructure for a new world. For now in a way this means 2 more fulltime jobs to save the world for those with the gutts to dig in and work on sustainability. We can organize human resources and all our available energy resources as well as work on the holes in the vision that are incomplete, all the while while still paying our bills and caring for our families. If we don't then we will have less preparation in place as changes in ecomomy or climate or whatever become more extreme.
Maybe the Venus folks have a part of the answer, I don't agree with them on all points, but I object to this wild jumping to conclusions that I am seeing here.
Whether it is Venus or some other project that attempts to face the challenges ahead for a sustainable humanity, I support us coming together to actually take the best of what works and create it. Maybe they are selling the land to build something bigger. Has anyone checked this out? I really think they have some valid points. I don't think that they alone will be humanity's saviors, but I also don't think easily dismissing away a lifetime of work from a brilliant and well intentioned man is fair or useful if we are going to survive as a species either.
I was a little put off by some of the religious views that I interpreted as machines were being more valuable to humanity than spirituality, on closer investigation of their various websites and after re-watching the video and reading a number of other articles, I believe that they were meaning to suggest rather that dogmatism and the controlling divisive fear-based structures that comprise religious dogma are outdated. Spirituality and the core of human relating to the divine is encouraged. So is constructive criticism and co-authoring the vision.
My original assessment now seems incorrect, in fact their plan would help to develop spiritual pursuits by providing more time to people to develop this aspect of self.
May we refrain from more premature speculation.
If they are selling out or turn out to be a fraud then should that stop us from using good ideas and putting them together? This is not about them- it's about all of us.
I am not going pre-judge them. I will communicate with them first. Then see what holds true and what can be worked with.
The Venus Project is for Sale for $550,000
The Venus Project Research Center for sale! Sun, 05/11/2008 - 20:45 — Patri
21 + acre park-like paradise, lush landscaping consisting of many ponds, lakes, hundreds of palm trees, various fruit and flowering trees, many large old, oak trees, two bridges and a large deck cantilevered over a lake. Ten buildings; hurricane resistant, fire resistant, termite resistant, concrete and steel buildings, 5 are domes, 3 homes, 1 office, 2 equipped shops, very large spa, 4 wells, 3 septic tanks. Listed at only $550K - you can't even get one house for that here in the SF Bay Area! This was the Research Center for Jacques Fresco's The Venus Project.
Zeitgesit II
-Casey Gramaglia
www.emptybamboo.com
The Venus Project Addendum