The Venus Project [Archive]

View Full Version : The Venus Project

Carl Sagan

15th August 2013, 00:23

Popular Front of Judea

15th August 2013, 02:58

Google 'site:revleft.com venus project'

tuwix

15th August 2013, 06:26

RedBen

15th August 2013, 06:45

The Venus Project is a project of communism. It recognizes as main problem a monetary economy which means an elimination or money. Besides it plans to limit property and replace its private part for utilization as Proudhon and other anarchists planned.
But its create Jacque Fresco says it isn't communism at all. The reason of that IMHO is compromising of a term of communism in bourgeois media. The Lenin's and Stalin's efforts helped in compromising it a lot to be honest.
Then Fresco propose a communism without communist label.

But disadvantage of the project is that there is no plan for transition period. There is even no greater will to work out such plan. And it makes this project utopian one.
i'm a huge fan of fresco for better or worse, he seems to hit the proverbial nail on the head consistently. it was him in large part that steered me toward communism. i agree with the idea that tvp is idealist from a technician or engineer's point of view, but then again i highly value educated people and appreciate the message jacque spreads about education. i don't think his vision will come into fruition but i think elements of it certainly will and that he has the right vision and idea. "man needs to be free to pursue the higher things, to bring each person to their highest potential". "we're not interested in emotions, we're interested in what you do with them." jf

RedBen

15th August 2013, 07:25

Rusty Shackleford

15th August 2013, 07:49

I would say stay away from it and the zeitgeist movement.

im just going to be blunt about it. its cooky.

Ã‘Ã³ẊÃ®Ã¶ŉ

15th August 2013, 08:11

Didn't the Venus Project and the Zeitgeist movement go their separate ways recently? That's what I've heard at least.

tuwix

15th August 2013, 10:18

Formally, they did. But they're still saying virtually the same.

A Revolutionary Tool

15th August 2013, 20:34

RedBen

15th August 2013, 20:49

TVP is a utopian movement that doesn't really have a really good plan of action(one of the steps towards the completion of the project is to create a amusement park showcasing how cool it would be to live like that). Plus it's anti-working class power, instead it would rely on engineers and scientists to organize everything while we're just their playthings. I like to think of the movement/Jaque as sort of a 21st Century advocate of the philosopher king but instead of philosopher it's a scientist.
interesting observation. do you feel it is working class exclusion?(i'm not trying to assume your point of view just curious). he calls for everyone to be educated in whatever fields they choose, i don't think he is putting engineers and scientists on a pedestal above normal people. (although he might be, i can't speak for the man) i think he stresses the importance of things necessary for people to live comfortably, even without having money or political sway or power. he says "machines should free man, man has to be free". i assume when most people who understand communism or anarchism refer to those things that they refer to them as free societies. in all reality everyone needs to work together in my opinion, we cannot continue a road of divisions and exclusion and hyper individualism. as jacque stresses, we must eliminate competition if we are to thrive as a species and subsequently as a planet. i agree his view is idealist, but i don't fault him for it. he does not offer a transitional theory or approach at all from what i gather but i think ultimately he is helping the cause, encouraging critical thinking, to question all things objectively, and contribute what you can as an individual.

Popular Front of Judea

15th August 2013, 20:57

Hmm I think they should build an orbital colony visible in the daytime sky. That should work out well...

TVP is a utopian movement that doesn't really have a really good plan of action(one of the steps towards the completion of the project is to create a amusement park showcasing how cool it would be to live like that). Plus it's anti-working class power, instead it would rely on engineers and scientists to organize everything while we're just their playthings. I like to think of the movement/Jaque as sort of a 21st Century advocate of the philosopher king but instead of philosopher it's a scientist.

http://www.straight.com/files/styles/popup/public/CN_Elysium.JPG

A Revolutionary Tool

15th August 2013, 22:14

interesting observation. do you feel it is working class exclusion?(i'm not trying to assume your point of view just curious). he calls for everyone to be educated in whatever fields they choose, i don't think he is putting engineers and scientists on a pedestal above normal people. (although he might be, i can't speak for the man) i think he stresses the importance of things necessary for people to live comfortably, even without having money or political sway or power. he says "machines should free man, man has to be free". i assume when most people who understand communism or anarchism refer to those things that they refer to them as free societies. in all reality everyone needs to work together in my opinion, we cannot continue a road of divisions and exclusion and hyper individualism. as jacque stresses, we must eliminate competition if we are to thrive as a species and subsequently as a planet. i agree his view is idealist, but i don't fault him for it. he does not offer a transitional theory or approach at all from what i gather but i think ultimately he is helping the cause, encouraging critical thinking, to question all things objectively, and contribute what you can as an individual.
Yes I think it is exclusionary. Have you read the FAQ on their website, their plans, etc? They're basically a technocratic movement that says in the end a system of computers will be the decision making body. In the meantime during the transitional period there would teams of scientists and engineers who design and plan out all the details.

Sam_b

15th August 2013, 22:56

When it comes to Zeitgeist, at least, there's a horrible racist and anti-semitic streak involved and it's a crock of nonsense.

This, and some critiques of the Venus Project can be seen here (http://ssy.org.uk/2010/06/shitegeist/). Not a perfect article, but food for thought.

Skyhilist

15th August 2013, 23:36

I think it's at least interesting given that it's one of the only modern examples of utopian socialism.

RedBen

16th August 2013, 03:32

Yes I think it is exclusionary. Have you read the FAQ on their website, their plans, etc? They're basically a technocratic movement that says in the end a system of computers will be the decision making body. In the meantime during the transitional period there would teams of scientists and engineers who design and plan out all the details.
lot of news to me, i seen their docs, i don't know how that went by me. thanks for the link, i'm gonna read it out... i've never been a part of the movement in any case.

RadioRaheem84

16th August 2013, 22:27

If I already hated technocrats I can only imagine how much I would hate the Venus Project. Just the thought of it's uptopian "socialist" ideas makes me think of Fabian Socialists and their ant-proletariat super pro-intellectual/pro-technocratic positions.

VinnieUK

26th August 2013, 10:17

Not sure where to put this topic, perhaps the mod could decide for me.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-23799590

What do socialists think about The Venus project!

ANTIFA GATE-9

26th August 2013, 11:34

In the video the guy says he wants to benefit all human beings(as a whole I hope) but the city some house look pretty luxurious. Also I think in the video it says that machines will do the humans jobs in factories so that's not appealing to a communist or a socialist, I mean what will the workers do since there's no work?
Maybe I misunderstood the video but I don't think the Venus Project is that appealing to me since machines do the humans job. Maybe if the humans just did the jobs I would consider it but not like that. Again though I might have misunderstood it.

Ceallach_the_Witch

26th August 2013, 12:01

tuwix

26th August 2013, 12:29

Not sure where to put this topic, perhaps the mod could decide for me.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-23799590

What do socialists think about The Venus project!

This topic was discussed some time yet.
For example:
http://www.revleft.com/vb/venus-project-t182664/index.html?p=2652057

And my opinion hasn't changed about it. But I can reitearet it:

The Venus Project is a project of communism. It recognizes as main problem a monetary economy which means an elimination or money. Besides it plans to limit property and replace its private part for utilization as Proudhon and other anarchists planned.
But its create Jacque Fresco says it isn't communism at all. The reason of that IMHO is compromising of a term of communism in bourgeois media. The Lenin's and Stalin's efforts helped in compromising it a lot to be honest.
Then Fresco propose a communism without communist label.

But disadvantage of the project is that there is no plan for transition period. There is even no greater will to work out such plan. And it makes this project utopian one.

In the video the guy says he wants to benefit all human beings(as a whole I hope) but the city some house look pretty luxurious. Also I think in the video it says that machines will do the humans jobs in factories so that's not appealing to a communist or a socialist, I mean what will the workers do since there's no work?
Maybe I misunderstood the video but I don't think the Venus Project is that appealing to me since machines do the humans job. Maybe if the humans just did the jobs I would consider it but not like that. Again though I might have misunderstood it.

And it is exactly most appealing to me and one of the main reasons why I am here.
Furthermore, I think it is only way how communism can be achieved. I mean when machines will be able to produce more than 95% of work needed and it won't be needed anymore. And I think it was exactly what Marx meant saying "according to the needs". Then and only then everyone will might become a poet, writer, singer, actor, etc. Certainly now you can be them too, but only few can be merely occupied in it.

Although it must be said that the Venus Project has never ansewred how to get there. Fortunately, the economics have.

ANTIFA GATE-9

26th August 2013, 12:44

why wouldn't we want to use machines to do as much work as is practical? The whole point of automation is to free up time for workers. I agree that in a capitalist system automation is not agreeable because it simply pushes labourers out of work or cuts their hours/wages, but in a post-capitalist system machines simply cut out the work we don't want to do (either because it's dangerous or boring)

I was talking about it in a capitalist system, in a communist system it would be ideal but like tuwix said it dosent cover how to get there.

ANTIFA GATE-9

26th August 2013, 12:48

Fortunately, the economic have.
I don't understand what you mean by this.

tuwix

26th August 2013, 13:23

I meant science of economics, but my dyslexia didn't allow me to write correctly.

And science of economics know exactly how to develop an economy. Certainly bourgeois masks it by ignorance. There are known methods to qet assets needed for automation and mechanisation. They are taxation of rich and printing of money. Obvioiusly pirnting of money has ts negative side called inflation, but science of economics have found solution to this problem too. It is wage indexing and double currency. But class realiy (rules of bourgeoisie) and/or ignorance of rulers don't allow to apply it.

ANTIFA GATE-9

26th August 2013, 13:32

Oh I understand. Thanks:thumbup1:

Sam_b

26th August 2013, 14:46

I've gone ahead and merged these threads. Thank me later!

JPSartre12

26th August 2013, 14:56

why wouldn't we want to use machines to do as much work as is practical? The whole point of automation is to free up time for workers. I agree that in a capitalist system automation is not agreeable because it simply pushes labourers out of work or cuts their hours/wages, but in a post-capitalist system machines simply cut out the work we don't want to do (either because it's dangerous or boring)

I agree. Why would we not want to automate a majority of labor, if not only to free-up time that workers would be putting in to the creation of unneeded surplus-value and instead have them engage in volitious activities for their own creative self-development?

Sinister Cultural Marxist

26th August 2013, 18:25

I don't know much about the Venus Project, though the architectural styles seem to work in the context of a commune in that there is open, public space, no class division in urban planning, efficient public transit and public planning of affairs. I don't know whether he thinks the society should be run by technocrats or workers, but IMO a classless society wouldn't really have distinct "technocrats" or "workers" anyways. The issue is that there is no feasible way to achieve this - it's a utopian project. Utopian projects can be useful though for envisioning what kind of society might get built and what it might look like, even if it has no practical vision of how to get there.

A Revolutionary Tool

26th August 2013, 22:02

People here keep saying there isn't a transitional phase, no explanation of how to really get there when there's a lot of material on their website that talks about the transitional phase and how to get there.

Hamguy

24th September 2013, 03:06

People here seem to not understand or have very bias views about the venus project.
I just had to join the forum to explain what my interpretation of the venus project is.

First of all, there is no government, there is no such thing as communism, socialism or anarchism. these are all types of government which are corrupt from the beginning.

Who is the Leader?
no one, the people who make the decisions are the people who live in the venus project's society, not decisions that intrude on others but decisions which have been gathered by data, lets say there is a drought in a region, the people make a decision to do something about it through data gathered in a central computer in every city. its not a computer which rules over people, the computer is used as a tool to help the people and gather information.

=
Technocracy is a form of government which will be corrupted from the start. Population control, inflated ego's. its a form of government which does not have the best interest of human beings in mind, but the best interests of these so called "experts", any form of government in the hands of humans will be corrupt no matter how well intentioned it may be.
=

Who is going to do the work?
at first we will need experts to build robots and automation tools which will do all manual labor, people are afraid of technology today because robotics remove thousands of jobs, robots should be praised but because we live in a society which values money over people its the other way around. Robots can take care of all automation, tools like the 3D printer can become very advance, it is my personal believe that 3d printers are an early form of star trek style matter materializer. anything can be created by taking in air and constructing it into usable structures. but that is far into the future for now.

Its Utopian
There is no such thing as utopian, but you can create a society which does its best to help people live a comfortable life. you will never become a near utopian society by making utopia a bad word. if you distance yourself from something of course you will never reach it.

I don't like the buildings
the buildings are only meant to be placeholders and not meant to represent what the buildings should or will look like but it is a good start and they are very aesthetic.

How will the city be powered
the cities will be powered by Natural Powers, such as Wind, Solar, Geothermal, even Thorium nuclear reactors are safe and natural. there is such thing as Photovoltaic Paint, all buildings can be painted in photovoltaic paint. Windows can also be fitted with transparent photovoltaic layers.

How do you distribute Goods without money
If we wanted we could create a Technology Library, lets say you need a camera just go to the library and take it, there is no such thing as stealing as who will buy it with no money and who will want it when they can just get their own. robotics will process and grow foods, clean efficient and fast. vertical farms are a wonderful tool which can be used as sterile environments without the need of pesticides and unnatural poisons. vertical farms can grow foods year round locally and clean.

Who owns Property
You own your house and property, you don't get taxed no one tells you what to do with your house or property, if you need a bigger house just make a plan of your new living arrangements and how your home will look, it will automatically be replaced with robotics. if you want to live in a high-rise, most people will do this as it will be more convenient and limit space, entertainment, food, and schools will be located in each of these buildings. there isn't really a need to own anything but you are the one who decides what happens to your house not others, like communism or fascism and capitalism, even anarchy someone can take your home.

The whole point of the venus project is to give all human beings a higher standard of living through working together to improve ourselves, people will be left time to educate themselves or just simply live peacefully.

Imagine what people could be if they never had to worry about money, people go to school today and become a slave for live, why are we charging for education when its meant to help our society? kids are thought to be drones in schools, they get thought everything except how to think. schools are old, created to make workers who are just smart enough to read simple instructions but dumb enough to do boring jobs day in and out such as clean peoples shit out of toilets for little pay.

How do we transition to it
the more people know about the venus project the easier it gets, let's say one city decides to it wants to live like the venus project, its not going to survive very long because the rest of the world is running on money, if everyone on earth suddenly changes their views and throws out the notion of money and changes to a resource based economy, it would be a much easier transition and smoother. its not a flip a switch and everyone changes views. it requires Cooperation between everyone.

tuwix

24th September 2013, 06:19

Who owns Property
You own your house and property, you don't get taxed no one tells you what to do with your house or property

Actually TheVenus Projects planns to abolish property. Such explanation is only for capitalism's lovers but insufficent for them.

How do we transition to it
the more people know about the venus project the easier it gets, let's say one city decides to it wants to live like the venus project, its not going to survive very long because the rest of the world is running on money, if everyone on earth suddenly changes their views and throws out the notion of money and changes to a resource based economy, it would be a much easier transition and smoother. its not a flip a switch and everyone changes views. it requires Cooperation between everyone.

There are only rhetorics that prooves there is no real plan of transition on the Project Venus side. Such plan isn't rocket science, but it seems that they aren't interested in economics very much.

Creative Destruction

24th September 2013, 06:30

Actually TheVenus Projects planns to abolish property. Such explanation is only for capitalism's lovers but insufficent for them.

How do they reconcile wanting to "abolish property" but then say you'll own your own house and land? That doesn't make any sense unless you're trying to frame it in a Proudhondian sense, where "mixing" your labor with the land means you own it...

tuwix

24th September 2013, 08:20

ckaihatsu

26th September 2013, 00:01

Anyone have any thoughts or comments on the Venus Project? The explaining video on their site was rather vague in describing the actual system. Can anyone evaluate potential faults in the system based on the information given? The Venus Project proposes a "resource based economy". Here's the site if you are interested www (DOT) thevenusproject (DOT) com

P.S. I'm new to the site so please excuse any anomalies in this post from the posts of more experienced members!

A 'resource-based economy' is problematic because it is basically *consumeristic* -- it implicitly posits that consumers know best, and that *their* desires (vs. workers, vs. administration) should be given paramount importance.

[T]he pitfall of just putting-all-production-out-there is that it would be crudely *guess-timating* at how much air travel would be necessary, based on some kind of across-the-board average, presumably. Workers could readily complain about why they're working to make air travel so accessible when in fact it's *not* being specifically pre-planned, and so much overcapacity is continuously being produced.

---

interesting observation. do you feel it is working class exclusion?(i'm not trying to assume your point of view just curious). he calls for everyone to be educated in whatever fields they choose, i don't think he is putting engineers and scientists on a pedestal above normal people. (although he might be, i can't speak for the man)

[...]

I think it's important to point out that, in the spirit of communism, it's not good to rely on any approach that smacks of technocracy, or even the least bit of technical specialization. Instead, we should aim to generalize all technical knowledge and expertise among all individuals who are participating in the political process, whatever that may be. All political participants, in *any* context, are necessarily 'self-selected' in the sense that real political involvement requires conscious acts of will in a social setting -- those who don't want to do this kind of thing will thus not be participating.

[H]uman labor that advances automation can be self-organized by those who perform the labor and also those who have a stake in it (the broader public, as consumers). Such liberated labor would have an interest in running things as capably as possible, and so would want to *increase* the general ability to do those tasks to as many people as possible -- to build the base.

TAEHSAEN

26th September 2013, 08:54

I don't understand the hate for Venus Project / Zeitgeist Movement.

Yes, I absolutely HATE IT when Zeitgeisters disassociate themselves from Marxism (I refrain from using the word "communism" due to how people equate it with Stalinism / Maoism).

Zeitgeist Movement / Venus Project is DEFINITELY a branch of Marxism, no question about it. They DO in fact have a transition plan, but its not nearly detailed enough.

Most importantly, Zeitgeist Movement is EXACTLY the same as Marxism, except that we believe that the BEST way to distribute resources is to use the scientific method to do so (if using computers to do so is the most efficient way, then so be it).

We just emphasize technology so much, because it is essential in eliminating scarcity and maintaining high standards of living for everyone.

If true communism does came to being in the future (which of course, we all believe it will), it would actually look a lot like the Resource Based Economy because technology is what will liberate people from slave labor and ensure abundance for everyone.

However, I COMPLETELY COMPLETELY COMPLETELY agree with you on the fact that I HATE Zeitgeister's tendency to smear communism (stalinism to be more precise) and not give enough credit to Carl Marx and other Marxists, because our WHOLE IDEOLOGY is based on Marxism.

But yeah guys, give Zeitgeist a chance. We advocate the same thing you do. We just differ in a few minor details :)

ВАЛТЕР

26th September 2013, 11:30

TAEHSAEN

26th September 2013, 11:47

They're irrelevant as far as left-politics are concerned. They can't be a Marxist movement as they don't recognize class struggle, historical materialism, etc. They remind me more of a cult than an actual political force.

I think the proper course of action should be to point and laugh at them.

Resource Based Economy in particular is a system, rather than a philosophy. Therefore yes, you are correct when you say it does not recognize class struggle. However, isn't it actually based heavily on historical materialism? (its likely that I don't know enough about this so I didn't understand what you mean. Please excuse my mistake if that is the case)

The Venus Project and The Zeitgeist Movement on the other hand do present their own philosophy(ies) which do recognize class struggle and historical materialism. I guess the problem is that they do not cover it as extensively as other Marxists.

But at the end of the day, even if Fresco's (Venus Project) philosophies do not pertain to a proper Marxist Movement, its definitely a branch of Marxism in either case.

Hey, I'm just paying respect to where its due (unlike most other Zeitgeisters).

Also, as a side note, Zeitgeist / Venus Project are dying movements so I'm here to learn more about a philosophy that has and will stand the test of time :)

Glad to be here :)

Creative Destruction

26th September 2013, 18:19

It's just rhetoric. In fact they are for abolition of private property. They are against monetary system, and not for barter. They for distribution goods without payment. It's obvious that it is abolition of private property. But due to bad fame of such demands they are descriobing it otherwise.

Why would they even build that frame if it isn't nearly close to their program? Do they think the Libertarians who they're trying to court are just going to give up a vital part of their ideology, because of "rhetoric"?

Comrade Jacob

26th September 2013, 18:22

It sounds well meaning but the liberal approach that it brings is really off putting.

Sam_b

26th September 2013, 18:32

I don't understand the hate for Venus Project / Zeitgeist Movement

Because I showed, in the link I provided on page one, that Zeitgeist's ideas heavily originate from far-right and anti-semitic movements. Just look at the films using quotes and heaping praise on the likes of Louis McFadden - the anti-semitic Congressman who tried to run for President under the banner of "keep the Jew out of control of the Republican Party!" and regularly gave speeches in the House from the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Zeitgeist uses a tonne of his quotes on the economy, but don't mention that his idea of economics come from his belief that the international banking system is a 'Jewish conspiracy'.

Lyndon LaRouche is also quoted there - the leader of a dangerous cult that peddles racist lies day in, day out. Zeitgeist's idea of the ruling class goal of 'one world government' is straight out of these historical and racist organisations and their beliefs around 'ZOG' and so on. What Zeitgeist merely does, it take the word 'Jew' out of the equation, despite the economic and political theory of these ideas absolutely cannot be separated from them.

Don't even get me started on Zietgeist's relationship and links with groups that peddle "9/11 inside job" nonsense and "climate change was invented by scientists" folk like We Are Change.

So no, they have nothing to do with Marxism in the slightest.

tuwix

26th September 2013, 19:40

Why would they even build that frame if it isn't nearly close to their program? Do they think the Libertarians who they're trying to court are just going to give up a vital part of their ideology, because of "rhetoric"?

As I wrote recently, demand of the abolition's property isn't very popular. If you refer to libertarian as Ron Paul's religion, then I must remind you that Ron Paul's religion loves capitalism and the Project Venus hates it and plans to abolish money and even private property although they hide this intent.

So no, they have nothing to do with Marxism in the slightest.

Abolition of money and replacing the monetary system with distrubution without payment that is in fact abolition of private porpety has nothing to do with Marxism? :D

The Idler

26th September 2013, 19:52

Didn't the Venus Project and the Zeitgeist movement go their separate ways recently? That's what I've heard at least.
Yes they did.

Sam_b

26th September 2013, 20:12

Abolition of money and replacing the monetary system with distrubution without payment that is in fact abolition of private porpety has nothing to do with Marxism?

First of all, loaded statement, so poor showing.

Secondly, yes. It is necessary to see Marxism within its entire framework, otherwise it's very easy to pick and choose objects in isolation and say they are 'Marxist', which is what you've done here.

Zeitgeist's idea of economics, abolition of money or not, are not Marxist. This is very simply because they do not either understand or acknowledge that at the root of the economy is human labour, the labour of the working class, and as such it is the workers who have the power to exact fundamental change.

Zeitgeist's economics is based on the idea of "international bankers" creating a superstate that enslaves the rest of the world. This group of 'bankers' create a cycle of wealth by artificial means - so says the Zeitgeist. Marxists, on the other hand, don't understand it like this at all - rather, money is a mediator of social relations between different groups in society, and reflects the cost of creation of commodities. Such money is then reinvested under capitalism in order to make more money, for instance invested in larger factories and systems in order to extract more surplus value from workers. This is not the work of a few 'bankers' at the top of the chain, but rather an entire system, that of capitalism. The concept of a "banker's conspiracy", which Zeitgeist relies on, has its origins in the right-wing, anti-Semitic ZOG and Jewish Conspiracy theories. This isn't Marxism whichever way you look at it.

As for the system of distribution without payment which Zeitgeist/The Venus Project argues for, that isn't particularly Marxist either. Rather than having the resources and distribution at the hands of the working class, Zeitgeist believe that this can be coordinated by a bunch of scientists and a society run by "experts" in that particular field. What is Marxist about this? Not much.

I suggest that rather than cherry-pick some quotes that sound nice to you and say that they've got to be Marxist, you need to actually understand the political and economic argument that Zeitgeist is trying to advance; and actually have an understanding of how capitalism works and what the solution to it is.

Ã‘Ã³ẊÃ®Ã¶ŉ

26th September 2013, 20:22

Yes they did.

In which case they should be making a whole lot more noise about that, since as Sam_b demonstrates there are those who will conflate the two. I think it would be a terrible shame for a sensible idea like a resource-based economy to be tarnished by sketchy conspiracy-theory shite.

Sam_b

26th September 2013, 20:55

In which case they should be making a whole lot more noise about that, since as Sam_b demonstrates there are those who will conflate the two.

I am aware of this, yes, but there has to be a conflation at some point, since the Venus Project's RBE stuff is still advocated (I think, it's certainly advocated by many members) as the solution by Zeitgeist. I'm not suggesting in my posts above that the Venus Project harbours anti-semitic ideas - Zeitgeist does, but it does not - but rather that the Venus Project's answers are not based in Marxism. I use the / because in my analysis of the films, those answers ar eone in the same - created by Venus, and advocated by ZG.

Ã‘Ã³ẊÃ®Ã¶ŉ

26th September 2013, 21:12

I am aware of this, yes, but there has to be a conflation at some point, since the Venus Project's RBE stuff is still advocated (I think, it's certainly advocated by many members) as the solution by Zeitgeist. I'm not suggesting in my posts above that the Venus Project harbours anti-semitic ideas - Zeitgeist does, but it does not - but rather that the Venus Project's answers are not based in Marxism.

Would you say that the notion of RBEs as a whole are incompatible with Marxism?

Sam_b

26th September 2013, 22:08

I think that's the subject for an altogether different thread, my main awareness of RBE comes from the Venus Project's idea of it, which I reject.

tuwix

27th September 2013, 06:33

TAEHSAEN

27th September 2013, 08:07

Because I showed, in the link I provided on page one, that Zeitgeist's ideas heavily originate from far-right and anti-semitic movements. Just look at the films using quotes and heaping praise on the likes of Louis McFadden - the anti-semitic Congressman who tried to run for President under the banner of "keep the Jew out of control of the Republican Party!" and regularly gave speeches in the House from the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Zeitgeist uses a tonne of his quotes on the economy, but don't mention that his idea of economics come from his belief that the international banking system is a 'Jewish conspiracy'.

Lyndon LaRouche is also quoted there - the leader of a dangerous cult that peddles racist lies day in, day out. Zeitgeist's idea of the ruling class goal of 'one world government' is straight out of these historical and racist organisations and their beliefs around 'ZOG' and so on. What Zeitgeist merely does, it take the word 'Jew' out of the equation, despite the economic and political theory of these ideas absolutely cannot be separated from them.

Don't even get me started on Zietgeist's relationship and links with groups that peddle "9/11 inside job" nonsense and "climate change was invented by scientists" folk like We Are Change.

So no, they have nothing to do with Marxism in the slightest.

Are we talking about the same thing here? I don't quite remember if Zeitgeist used any Louis McFadden quotes, but even if they did, how does that make them anti semetic? "If you find a diamond in the trash, then take it". Even if Louis McFadden is anti semitic, it does not mean that if he says SOMETHING wise once in a while, we should reject that as well. This is a straw man you put forth against TZM.

I'm also appalled by your line

"Zeitgeist's idea of the ruling class goal of 'one world government' is straight out of these historical and racist organisations and their beliefs around 'ZOG' and so on."

Zeitgeist SPECIFICALLY mentions there is NO SUCH THING as one world government, etc. etc. INFACT WE ENCOURAGE a UNITED WORLD with no seperate nations as it is one of the only ways to make a marxist system work. Are we talking about the same thing here?

And 9/11 does not officially take any side on the 9/11 part, the founder, Peter Joseph, does believe 9/11 was an inside job. And after objectively reviewing hundreds of evidence from both sides, I will confidently say that 9/11 was in fact an inside job. Anyone who disagrees has not given equal weight to both sides of the story. Its as simple as that.

""[Zeitgeist believes] climate change was invented by scientists" folk like We Are Change. "

And ONCE AGAIN. ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THE SAME ORGANIZATION HERE? Zeitgeist is a strong advocate for fighting against climate change and we believe this is yet another major draw back of capitalism.

I'm sorry sir, but you simply have no idea what zeitgeist is about do you?

In a nutshell, Zeitgeist / RBE is Marxism with a heavy focus on technology and the scientific method.

TAEHSAEN

27th September 2013, 08:14

First of all, loaded statement, so poor showing.

Secondly, yes. It is necessary to see Marxism within its entire framework, otherwise it's very easy to pick and choose objects in isolation and say they are 'Marxist', which is what you've done here.

Zeitgeist's idea of economics, abolition of money or not, are not Marxist. This is very simply because they do not either understand or acknowledge that at the root of the economy is human labour, the labour of the working class, and as such it is the workers who have the power to exact fundamental change.

Zeitgeist's economics is based on the idea of "international bankers" creating a superstate that enslaves the rest of the world. This group of 'bankers' create a cycle of wealth by artificial means - so says the Zeitgeist. Marxists, on the other hand, don't understand it like this at all - rather, money is a mediator of social relations between different groups in society, and reflects the cost of creation of commodities. Such money is then reinvested under capitalism in order to make more money, for instance invested in larger factories and systems in order to extract more surplus value from workers. This is not the work of a few 'bankers' at the top of the chain, but rather an entire system, that of capitalism. The concept of a "banker's conspiracy", which Zeitgeist relies on, has its origins in the right-wing, anti-Semitic ZOG and Jewish Conspiracy theories. This isn't Marxism whichever way you look at it.

As for the system of distribution without payment which Zeitgeist/The Venus Project argues for, that isn't particularly Marxist either. Rather than having the resources and distribution at the hands of the working class, Zeitgeist believe that this can be coordinated by a bunch of scientists and a society run by "experts" in that particular field. What is Marxist about this? Not much.

I suggest that rather than cherry-pick some quotes that sound nice to you and say that they've got to be Marxist, you need to actually understand the political and economic argument that Zeitgeist is trying to advance; and actually have an understanding of how capitalism works and what the solution to it is.

Ok. You are WAY OVERBOARD touchy about the subject of anti-semitism aren't you (seeing how you mention it in EVERY POST you make).

So tell me, if I claim that Israel is committing apartheid against the Palestinians, would you call me antisemitic as well? 0_0

NO PART of Zeitgeist is antisemitic dude. I have absolutely no idea why you get such ideas. Just because they might have used a quote or two from antisemitic people doesn't make the whole organization antisemitic.

And no. Their concept of economy ISN'T based on "international bankers" or whatever the hell you call it.

Its based on the concept that everything on earth is common heritage of all human beings.

Please do your research before you attempt to smear something you have 0 idea about.

Sam_b

27th September 2013, 12:34

And answer is: Yes, they have something to do with Marxism.

You didn't read what I said at all, did you? You know, that bit where I said it's impossible to cherry-pick what is considered Marxism and there is a need to see concepts within the framework of Marxism itself? It's akin to saying having disdain for religion is 'Marxist' because he wrote on it once - entirely irrelevant unless one sees it within Marxism as a whole. If something has something to do with Marxism, it must be in essence, Marxist, right?

27th September 2013, 13:05

Zeitgeist Movement / Venus Project is DEFINITELY a branch of Marxism, no question about it.
Oh? In what way do they scientifically analyse society in order to understand it and plan political strategies to work towards the revolutionary self-emancipation of the working class to liberate humanity from the rule of capital?

They DO in fact have a transition plan, but its not nearly detailed enough.
Could you link me to it? I have been on their website quite a few times yet somehow always missed this.

On another note: Didn't the Zeitgeist movement and the Venus Project break up some time back? Why are you still mentioning the Zeitgeisters then, as it is off topic?

Most importantly, Zeitgeist Movement is EXACTLY the same as Marxism, except that we believe that the BEST way to distribute resources is to use the scientific method to do so (if using computers to do so is the most efficient way, then so be it).
Presuming that by 'we' you're referring to yourself as a Zeitgeister, I don't see how Marxists would be opposed to that. In fact, Revleft user Paul Cockshott co-wrote a book on the subject of computers and socialist planning a while back (http://ricardo.ecn.wfu.edu/~cottrell/socialism_book/).

We just emphasize technology so much, because it is essential in eliminating scarcity and maintaining high standards of living for everyone.

If true communism does came to being in the future (which of course, we all believe it will), it would actually look a lot like the Resource Based Economy because technology is what will liberate people from slave labor and ensure abundance for everyone.
Again, no fundamental disagreement.

We just differ in a few minor details :)
I don't think the differences are as minor as you make it out to be. That doesn't mean we shouldn't work together where possible, but we shouldn't smooth over these differences but debate them. Just to summarize: Marxists aim for radical democracy and political working class hegemony, the Zeitgeisters just seem to focus on utilizing computers and burning money.

Sam_b

27th September 2013, 13:12

but even if they did, how does that make them anti semetic?

Wow. You have obviously ignored everything I said in my posts then. Allow me to quote you, emphasis mine (you even quoted them yourself!):

Zeitgeist uses a tonne of his quotes on the economy, but don't mention that his idea of economics come from his belief that the international banking system is a 'Jewish conspiracy'.

Lyndon LaRouche is also quoted there - the leader of a dangerous cult that peddles racist lies day in, day out. Zeitgeist's idea of the ruling class goal of 'one world government' is straight out of these historical and racist organisations and their beliefs around 'ZOG' and so on. What Zeitgeist merely does, it take the word 'Jew' out of the equation, despite the economic and political theory of these ideas absolutely cannot be separated from them.

The economic theories advocated by McFadden cannot be separated from his anti-Semitism, as his theory originates in the ideas perpetuated by the Protocols of the Elders of Zion: namely, that there is an elite Jewish conspiracy which runs the world and controls the world flow of money. As I pointed out, Zeitgeist's theory merely changes the Jewish conspiracy to a banking conspiracy of a few elites. Now, I'm sure I don't have to tell you about the history of anti-semitism with regards to 'Jewish bankers' do I? Even if I don't, the whole understanding of Zeitgeist's theory comes from a very right-wing and bigoted ideology, that ideology which advocated policy that was entirely inseparable from its anti-semitism.

it does not mean that if he says SOMETHING wise once in a while, we should reject that as well. This is a straw man you put forth against TZM.

We should reject his political and economic theory because it is hopelessly intertwined with anti-semitism. Though Zeitgeisters are very used to having to take this line in an attempt to separate themselves from the backgrounds they take their theories from. Let's hear what Peter Joseph says, straight from a youtube speech:

If I find someone who’s in the KKK who has a great perspective on global finance, I’m not going to dismiss them just because they’re a racist and a bigot, I’m going to read what it is. I don’t dismiss anybody because of their beliefs because I understand that beliefs are a product of cultural conditioning.

It is nigh-on impossible to see the politics of the far-right in isolation of their anti-semitic worldview. Zeitgeisters just don't get this.

Zeitgeist SPECIFICALLY mentions there is NO SUCH THING as one world government, etc. etc. INFACT WE ENCOURAGE a UNITED WORLD with no seperate nations as it is one of the only ways to make a marxist system work. Are we talking about the same thing here?

I didn't mention that Zeitgeist thinks there is one world government in place, rather that Zeitgeist believes steps are being made to make this happen. Don't believe me? Watch Part III "Don't Mind the Men Behind the Curtain", which claims that there is a conspiracy to incorporate the US, Canada and Mexico into a 'North American Union' which they then explicitly say is a step towards a one-world government. Funnily enough, you guys have been called out on this stuff before, which is then why Zeitgeist updated the film in 2010 removing this speculation.

INFACT WE ENCOURAGE a UNITED WORLD with no seperate nations as it is one of the only ways to make a marxist system work. Are we talking about the same thing here?

A 'united world' is not a 'united government' and as I explain in a subsequent post, you don't encourage a Marxist system at all.

Ok. You are WAY OVERBOARD touchy about the subject of anti-semitism aren't you (seeing how you mention it in EVERY POST you make)

Are revolutionaries not supposed to be 'touchy' about prejudice against Jewish people, which has resulted in Jews being persecuted for centuries? As I've argued, Zeitgeist's economics are lifted directly from anti-semitic movements. All you've done is attempted to deflect away from this, and now you've got to the point you're accusing me of being 'overboard' because you simply cannot weasel your way out of it.

So tell me, if I claim that Israel is committing apartheid against the Palestinians, would you call me antisemitic as well? 0_0

Strawmen of all strawmen. There's a big difference between Jews and Israelis.I don't think that everyone involved in Zeitgeist is anti-semitic, but Zeitgeist's politics come from anti-semitic, racist sources. Sources which cannot be separated from them as they are so entrenched.

NO PART of Zeitgeist is antisemitic dude. I have absolutely no idea why you get such ideas.

Yes you do. In fact, you quoted them in your previous post and tried to dismiss them by saying that people like McFadden could say something alright once in a while. The source I quoted, plus my analysis, shows the connection. You know exactly where I "got the ideas", unless you simply quote posts without reading them (and judging by your response, without actually tackling them).

Just because they might have used a quote or two from antisemitic people doesn't make the whole organization antisemitic.

For those who are reading this, let's recap. In the space of two posts TAEHSAEN has tried to explain Zeitgeist's line away by:

1. Questioning if McFadden is actually anti-semitic.
2. Saying that he has no idea "where I got such ideas"
3. Now directly contradicting himself a sentence before by saying "just because they've quoted some anti-semitic people..."

It's clear TAEHSAEN is desperately flapping to try and make the huge problem of Zeitgeist's politics go away. To tackle his point three, well, I already did so, but seeing as I don't think he reads what I say and actually thinks about it, I'll break it down into simplistic terms:

Point One: McFadden, who is quoted approvingly in the films, and at length. The most important quote Zeitgeist holds up is this:

A world banking system was being set up here… a superstate controlled by international bankers acting together to enslave the world for their own pleasure…”

This is quite neatly one of the major pillars of TZM thought.

Point Two: McFadden's politics, and indeed this line, comes from a book called The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. The book is a Russian forgery used to try and spread anti-semitism, and argues that there is a world conspiracy, where Jews aim to establish a global movement by being an elite that controls international finance, banks and money. La Rouche, who is also quoted in the films, noises up these sources as well.

Point Three: This is where the origin of One World Government comes from. The elite conspiracy nonsense was first and foremost put in place in this book. The point of the book is that this theory cannot be separated from the idea that it is a Jewish conspiracy.

Point Four: The idea of 'Jewish bankers' controlling wealth has been around for centuries, is explicitly tied with anti-semitism and is concretised in the book. The important thing is that even if you remove the term 'Jewish', the theory itself is intrinsically tied to the idea of a Jewish elite - removing references to Jews does not stop it being a political and economic theory borne out of racism.

Ergo, Zeitgeist's assertions are intrinsically tied to racist sources advocated by anti-semites with an agenda against the Jews. This does not mean all Zeitgeisters are anti-semites, but their entire theory originates from it.

Please do your research

So watching the films and reading articles isn't 'research'? You haven't been able to argue against anything I've said, just provided bluster and attempts to divert.

Sam_b

27th September 2013, 13:14

That doesn't mean we shouldn't work together where possible

If there's one thing I'm certain on, it is that revolutionaries should certainly not work alongside the Zeitgeist movement and it should be treated as an opposing ideology.

27th September 2013, 13:18

If there's one thing I'm certain on, it is that revolutionaries should certainly not work alongside the Zeitgeist movement and it should be treated as an opposing ideology.
Opposing? That would be a little strong. Sure, there are many lunatics driven to this, like the conspiracy scene. But the fact is that there no ideology worth speaking off besides that Peter Joseph is making films about. As such this 'movement' (such as it is) consists of all kinds layers.

But even if it does consist purely of reactionaries, that still does not exclude debate. Quite the contrary.

Sam_b

27th September 2013, 13:25

As I've tried to demonstrate in posts above, Zeitgeist's ideology is rooted in anti-semitism. This is another useful post from SU (http://socialistunity.com/zeitgeist-exposed/)

tuwix

27th September 2013, 16:44

If something has something to do with Marxism, it must be in essence, Marxist, right?

No, and you haven't read what I wrote. You've written that they (The Venus Project and the Zeitgeist Movement) "have nothing to do with Marxism". And you were wrong and in indirect way you've admited that,

It seems you have very negative emotions towards the Venus Project and this is why you don't want notice that quoting of anti-semites doesn't mean being antisemites. I can quote nazists, fascists, stalinists or monarchists for many different paurposes, but it doesn't automatically make one of them.

Sam_b

27th September 2013, 17:36

It seems you have very negative emotions towards the Venus Project and this is why you don't want notice that quoting of anti-semites doesn't mean being antisemites. I can quote nazists, fascists, stalinists or monarchists for many different paurposes, but it doesn't automatically make one of them.

I've dealt with this point not only once now, but twice, when I've argued that the ideology advocated by Zeitgeist cannot be separated from anti-semitism.

So if you're not going to read, and instead rely on strawmen and one-liner analysis for TZM apologism, then I'm pretty much done dealing with you.

tuwix

27th September 2013, 18:06

Then I quote someone and I ask few questions. Quote:

"Let us not look for the secret of the Jew in his religion, but let us look for the secret of his religion in the real Jew.

What is the secular basis of Judaism? Practical need, self-interest. What is the worldly religion of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly God? Money."

Is it antisemitic statement? Who did write it? Will you be consisitent and you will be oposing ideology represeneted by him?

I hope you answer without any evasions. :)

Sam_b

27th September 2013, 18:22

Is it antisemitic statement? Who did write it? Will you be consisitent and you will be oposing ideology represeneted by him?

I hope you answer without any evasions.

You don't fucking get it, do you? I hate to repeat myself again for idiots, but listen, and actually process what I'm telling you.

I've argued that the ideology advocated by Zeitgeist cannot be separated from anti-semitism

Let that sink in for a minute. I've demonstrated that the origins of Zeitgeist theory come straight out of the Protocols, in which anti-semitism is used to necessitate the argument within.

Quoting Marx on the Jewish question there doesn't change this. You know why champ? Because Marx's economic theory is not based on anti-semitism nor is it a factor in how said economic theory comes into being. If you still fail to understand, and I have provided plenty arguments in about half a dozen posts now, centring on the main argument that you cannot separate the anti-semitism of the Protocols as they are intertwined, then that's your problem.

I am not explaining myself again to you on this point.

tuwix

27th September 2013, 18:38

Because Marx's economic theory is not based on anti-semitism nor is it a factor in how said economic theory comes into being.

As well, as the Project Venus economy theory called the RBE. But you are very inconsistent in both cases.

And I've read what you've written and just strongly disagree with it in some cases.

Sam_b

27th September 2013, 20:29

Yeah that's all well and good but you've not been able to explain how or why beyond two or three sentences which I've already dealt with at length.

As well, as the Project Venus economy theory called the RBE

I dealt in post #42, second last paragraph, about the Venus Project's version of a resource based economy and why it isn't Marxist, so yeah, aside from Zeitgeist's position I've also mentioned them. Of course, you could also read the two articles I've cited as well.

But you are very inconsistent in both cases

No, no I haven't been. I have been very consistent in my analysis which has spanned a good half dozen posts now, and that can be seen in how I've referenced back to my own quotes and posts in every one. Your problem is you say something like this "oh but you are inconsistent and it's not actually an argument - it's just words. They don't mean anything because you've never pointed out where, never pointed out why, and have done nothing in this thread except simplistic one-liners.

I'm sure some posters on this forum will certainly disagree with me, and they'll likely say why exactly rather than what you've done, but I highly doubt any will find my argument 'inconsistent'.

robbo203

27th September 2013, 20:38

. I've demonstrated that the origins of Zeitgeist theory come straight out of the Protocols, in which anti-semitism is used to necessitate the argument within..

I've argued that the ideology advocated by Zeitgeist cannot be separated from anti-semitism

I dont think it necessarily follows that because a particular ideology (allegedly) has its origins in a particular theory, that that ideology, or the organisation embodying it , must necessarily bear the stamp of that theory in the way it currently interprets the world. Organisations and the ideologies they project are not static things but evolve over time and in a fashion that can quite possibly erase all trace of at least some , if not all, of their founding dogmas. Meaning you can in fact separate an ideology as currently advocated from its historical orgins

In this particular instance, I think the evidence you cite is weak and circumstantial. You refer to McFadden's antisemitic idea that "there is an elite Jewish conspiracy which runs the world and controls the world flow of money" Sure. its a crackpot idea and antisemitic at that. But then you say "As I pointed out, Zeitgeist's theory merely changes the Jewish conspiracy to a banking conspiracy of a few elites." But excuse me - how does that make Zeitgeists ideology antisemitic in itself? It might share in common with McFadden the view that a tiny financal elte controls the global economy and the flow of money within it but it does not follow from that that Zeitgeist is saying this is a specifically Jewish conspiracy. Unless you have evidence that this is what Zeitgeist is actually saying then your charge would seem to be complete unwarranted. Do you have such evidence? In which case, would you care to share it with us?

For myself, I reject the idea that capitalism is operated on the basis of some kind of conspracy (which is not to say, of course, that there are not conspiracies!). However the influence of finance capital on the workings of the capitalist economy cannot simply be brushed aside. In fact there is a burgeoning literature on the theory of financialisation which John Bellamy Foster usefully describes in these terms:

Indeed, since the 1970s we have witnessed what Kari Polanyi Levitt appropriately called “The Great Financialization.”6 Financialization can be defined as the long-run shift in the center of gravity of the capitalist economy from production to finance. This change has been reflected in every aspect of the economy, including: (1) increasing financial profits as a share of total profits; (2) rising debt relative to GDP; (3) the growth of FIRE (finance, insurance, and real estate) as a share of national income; (4) the proliferation of exotic and opaque financial instruments; and (5) the expanding role of financial bubbles.

(http://monthlyreview.org/2010/10/01/the-financialization-of-accumulation)

My guess - and it is only a guess since Im not that familiar with Zietgeist - is that Zeitgeist is tapping into a popular mood of unease at this "long-run shift in the center of gravity of the capitalist economy from production to finance" and the sense of outrage at governments bailing out the banks at a time of economic crisis while social welfare programme are brutally slashed.

Though the theory behind it is ultimately flawed and onesided, one can be forgiven for thinking - like Zeitgeist and large numbers of ordinary workers apparently - that it is the banks who pulll all the important strings in today's money obsessed world

Sam_b

27th September 2013, 21:43

But then you say "As I pointed out, Zeitgeist's theory merely changes the Jewish conspiracy to a banking conspiracy of a few elites." But excuse me - how does that make Zeitgeists ideology antisemitic in itself? It might share in common with McFadden the view that a tiny financal elte controls the global economy and the flow of money within it but it does not follow from that that Zeitgeist is saying this is a specifically Jewish conspiracy. Unless you have evidence that this is what Zeitgeist is actually saying then your charge would seem to be complete unwarranted. Do you have such evidence? In which case, would you care to share it with us?

I think I did. As mentioned earlier this link is particularly useful at arguing that the majority of Zeitgeist theory is lifted directly from the Protocols (http://socialistunity.com/zeitgeist-exposed/). It is far more expansive than my humble posts so far. I know this is a lazy response, perhaps, to your question, but if necessary I'll try to expand further at some point, maybe tomorrow.

TAEHSAEN

27th September 2013, 22:13

Wow. You have obviously ignored everything I said in my posts then. Allow me to quote you, emphasis mine (you even quoted them yourself!):

The economic theories advocated by McFadden cannot be separated from his anti-Semitism, as his theory originates in the ideas perpetuated by the Protocols of the Elders of Zion: namely, that there is an elite Jewish conspiracy which runs the world and controls the world flow of money. As I pointed out, Zeitgeist's theory merely changes the Jewish conspiracy to a banking conspiracy of a few elites. Now, I'm sure I don't have to tell you about the history of anti-semitism with regards to 'Jewish bankers' do I? Even if I don't, the whole understanding of Zeitgeist's theory comes from a very right-wing and bigoted ideology, that ideology which advocated policy that was entirely inseparable from its anti-semitism.

We should reject his political and economic theory because it is hopelessly intertwined with anti-semitism. Though Zeitgeisters are very used to having to take this line in an attempt to separate themselves from the backgrounds they take their theories from. Let's hear what Peter Joseph says, straight from a youtube speech:

It is nigh-on impossible to see the politics of the far-right in isolation of their anti-semitic worldview. Zeitgeisters just don't get this.

Sir, being a member of zeitgeist, and you NOT being a member of zetgeist, let me assert with the little authority I have that NO IDEOLOGY or no part of Zeitgeist / Venus Projects has ANY SORT of anti semitic elements to it.

Even if Peter quoted an anti-semitic individual, it doesn't matter AT ALL. As long as the quote was not anti-semitic itself, it doesn't matter. You sir have a very narrow view of the world.

Please stop using medicine.
You know why? Most modern day medicine came about due to animal testing. So since you are using / or used medicine that came about due to animal testing, you torture animals yourself.

Yes. You sound THIS ridiculous.

I didn't mention that Zeitgeist thinks there is one world government in place, rather that Zeitgeist believes steps are being made to make this happen. Don't believe me? Watch Part III "Don't Mind the Men Behind the Curtain", which claims that there is a conspiracy to incorporate the US, Canada and Mexico into a 'North American Union' which they then explicitly say is a step towards a one-world government. Funnily enough, you guys have been called out on this stuff before, which is then why Zeitgeist updated the film in 2010 removing this speculation.

well, first off, the 1st film is Peter Joseph's own personal opinions and it does not pertain to the movement itself.

HOWEVER, that being said, I do not know who these "men behind the curtains" are. But it matters not if they happen to be Jews, Muslims, Christians or ANYTHING else. The reality is that there are POWERFUL corporations who have crazy amounts of influence within our government and our economy and and in essence, they somewhat do "control" what our country does.
This is a symptom of capitalism because major corporations have a tendency to gain differential advantage and a common method of doing so is gaining large amounts of influence within the government. It does not matter if the major players are jews atheists muslims or satanists. What matters is that they are quite immoral and its a natural cause of capitalism.

But im sure you understand this.

A 'united world' is not a 'united government' and as I explain in a subsequent post, you don't encourage a Marxist system at all.

So basically you are a stalinist. Not a marxist.

Last I checked, a feature of marxism is a stateless society (and hence a united world).

A united government is there for transition into the final stages. So yes, either RBE and Marxism advocate the same stateless society or you are just a stalinist.

Are revolutionaries not supposed to be 'touchy' about prejudice against Jewish people, which has resulted in Jews being persecuted for centuries? As I've argued, Zeitgeist's economics are lifted directly from anti-semitic movements. All you've done is attempted to deflect away from this, and now you've got to the point you're accusing me of being 'overboard' because you simply cannot weasel your way out of it.

Strawmen of all strawmen. There's a big difference between Jews and Israelis.I don't think that everyone involved in Zeitgeist is anti-semitic, but Zeitgeist's politics come from anti-semitic, racist sources. Sources which cannot be separated from them as they are so entrenched.

1. So tell me, IS Israel committing apartheid against Palestinians or not? I am not talking about Jews here, but Israelis. The reason I ask is that you come across as a very pro Israel person (rather than a pro jew) because you drive this anti antisemitism thing WAY overboard. But seriously, answer this question, is Israel committing apartheid against Palestinians or not.

2. Show me ANY official anti semitic quote made by a Zeitgeist as a movement. ANY. If our quote does not contain anything antisemitic in it, then we are not antisemitic. As simple as that. If doing so makes us antisemitic, then YOU using medicine would make you an animal torturer.

For those who are reading this, let's recap. In the space of two posts TAEHSAEN has tried to explain Zeitgeist's line away by:

1. Questioning if McFadden is actually anti-semitic.
2. Saying that he has no idea "where I got such ideas"
3. Now directly contradicting himself a sentence before by saying "just because they've quoted some anti-semitic people..."

It's clear TAEHSAEN is desperately flapping to try and make the huge problem of Zeitgeist's politics go away. To tackle his point three, well, I already did so, but seeing as I don't think he reads what I say and actually thinks about it, I'll break it down into simplistic terms:

1. This is really bad argument from your part.. I personally do not know McFadden or his works so I cannot judge whether he is antisemitic or not (I certainly don't want to base my opinion off a person as biased as you are).

2. Your point #2 is irrelevant because I have consistently maintained that NO PART of zeitgeist EVER advocated antisemitism so only a mentally ill person would relate Zeitgeist to antisemitism (because there is NO antisemitism within the movement).

3. For point #3, you proved how desperate you are to save face because you blatantly took my words out of context. My point was that it does not MATTER if Zeitgeist quoted an antisemitic person, as long as the quote itself is not antisemitic. So instead of saying "whether or not Zeitgeist used a quote from an antisemetic person" I phrased my sentence as ""just because they've quoted some anti-semitic people...".

I did so because I assumed you had the level of intelligence to understand what I was meaning but you clearly do not.

Now please understand that I AM NOT disputing whether McFadden is anti semitic or not (I am not confirming or denying it) since I do not know much about McFadden or what he stands for. What I DO know however is that none of our quotes are anti-semetic.

Like I said, saying that Zeitgeist is antisemetic because they used a quote from an antisemetic person (although the quote itself is not antisemetic) is the same as saying that sam_b is an animal torturer for using medicine.

Point One: McFadden, who is quoted approvingly in the films, and at length. The most important quote Zeitgeist holds up is this:

A world banking system was being set up here… a superstate controlled by international bankers acting together to enslave the world for their own pleasure…”

This is quite neatly one of the major pillars of TZM thought.

Point Two: McFadden's politics, and indeed this line, comes from a book called The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. The book is a Russian forgery used to try and spread anti-semitism, and argues that there is a world conspiracy, where Jews aim to establish a global movement by being an elite that controls international finance, banks and money. La Rouche, who is also quoted in the films, noises up these sources as well..

Once again, I cannot dispute if McFadden is an antisemtic person or not. But what I CAN confirm is that all major banks work together to maintain oligopoly over the global markets and Zeitgeist was simply pointing out yet another flaw with capitalism. If you equate blaming bankers with being antisemitic, then you are either inferring that all jews are bankers (which is clearly not true) or you are just showing the world that you suffer from acute schizophrenia and need serious medical attention.

Point Three: This is where the origin of One World Government comes from. The elite conspiracy nonsense was first and foremost put in place in this book. The point of the book is that this theory cannot be separated from the idea that it is a Jewish conspiracy.

Point Four: The idea of 'Jewish bankers' controlling wealth has been around for centuries, is explicitly tied with anti-semitism and is concretised in the book. The important thing is that even if you remove the term 'Jewish', the theory itself is intrinsically tied to the idea of a Jewish elite - removing references to Jews does not stop it being a political and economic theory borne out of racism. .

Nope. Its not. Sorry. I doubt if all major bankers are Jewish. So when Zeitgeist is blaming bankers, they are blaming capitalism. Not jews. So if a person even MENTIONS bakers trying to exercise influence on world governments, it automatically becomes a "jewish conspiracy" and "antisemitic"?

I can use the same logic and saying that by just MENTIONING the word terrorism, you are being "antimuslimist". It works both ways.

All bankers are not jews. So blaming bankers is NOT blaming jews (hence its not anti semitism).

It is irrelevant where the idea originates from. What matters is the present reality and at present, the bankers have WAY too much power and needs to be stopped (a natural consequence of capitalism).

Ergo, Zeitgeist's assertions are intrinsically tied to racist sources advocated by anti-semites with an agenda against the Jews. This does not mean all Zeitgeisters are anti-semites, but their entire theory originates from it.

So watching the films and reading articles isn't 'research'? You haven't been able to argue against anything I've said, just provided bluster and attempts to divert.

Nope and nope. As I said, using quotes from questionable people does not make us questionable as long as the quote is valid / faultless.

If your line of reasoning was correct, then us using medicine would make us all animal torturers. It doesn't.

If Hitler came up with the theory of gravity, would you reject it just because he was an inhumane fascist? See my point?

And last, you clearly know absolutely NOTHING about the core principles of Zeitgeist. It has absolutely NOTHING to do with international bankers and McFadden's ideologies. The films may have used his quotes to prove a point about capitalism, but Zeitgeist is 100% about forming a system based around the principles that all resources on earth is common heritage of all human beings.

It has NOTHING to do with capitalism. We just use these materials to showcase the shortcomings of capitalism. But NO ASPECT of capitalism is present within our ideologies.

We just want a system that will allow everyone to thrive and live peacefully and happily.

Please refrain from making further comments about Zeitgeist because like I said, you have absolutely no idea about what you're talking about.

TAEHSAEN

27th September 2013, 22:20

I think I did. As mentioned earlier this link is particularly useful at arguing that the majority of Zeitgeist theory is lifted directly from the Protocols[/URL]. It is far more expansive than my humble posts so far. I know this is a lazy response, perhaps, to your question, but if necessary I'll try to expand further at some point, maybe tomorrow.

Sorry mate. Simply posting a link that reiterates your baseless claims does not prove anything.

As long as we don't say or do anything antisemitic, we are NOT antisemitic. Its as simple as that.

It does not matter where the origins of our reasoning (against capitalism) comes from the same way it would not have mattered if Hitler created the theory of gravity (you and I would still use it. but it wouldn't make us Nazi if we did).

Understand?

Sam_b

28th September 2013, 00:25

Sir, being a member of zeitgeist, and you NOT being a member of zetgeist, let me assert with the little authority

Yeah, sorry but that proves nothing at all. It's like that EDL guy that came here and said he could say for sure the EDL weren't racist because he was a member and we weren't.

Even if Peter quoted an anti-semitic individual, it doesn't matter AT ALL. As long as the quote was not anti-semitic itself, it doesn't matter. You sir have a very narrow view of the world.

Keep saying it all you like, it doesn't make my argument go away. I've already showed why in Zeitgeist's case this doesn't work.

Please stop using medicine.
You know why? Most modern day medicine came about due to animal testing. So since you are using / or used medicine that came about due to animal testing, you torture animals yourself.

Nice strawman.

HOWEVER, that being said, I do not know who these "men behind the curtains" are. But it matters not if they happen to be Jews, Muslims, Christians or ANYTHING else. The reality is that there are POWERFUL corporations who have crazy amounts of influence within our government and our economy and and in essence, they somewhat do "control" what our country does.
This is a symptom of capitalism because major corporations have a tendency to gain differential advantage and a common method of doing so is gaining large amounts of influence within the government. It does not matter if the major players are jews atheists muslims or satanists. What matters is that they are quite immoral and its a natural cause of capitalism.

I see what you're saying, I really do, and aside from saying this doesn't at all factor in labour surplus value etc etc it's agreeable. But the way it is presented in Zeitgeist is not this, is it? It's that there is some sort of small ruling elite of bankers.

So basically you are a stalinist. Not a marxist.

Last I checked, a feature of marxism is a stateless society (and hence a united world).

Ho ho, this is a bit funny. Firstly, no I'm not a Stalinist. Secondly, I am right, a united world is not a united government. I'm using 'united government' because that's what Zeitgeist is saying is the plan of those ol' bankers.

As I explained in a previous post, you cannot cherry-pick factors you think are Marxist without the entire Marxist view and analysis. A stateless society is not Marxist in itself. What I said if you look back is that Zeitgeist isn't Marxist because it at best underestimates and at worst ignores the role of manual labour, and has a different understanding of what money is than Marxists do.

A united government is there for transition into the final stages.

Hmmmm.

So yes, either RBE and Marxism advocate the same stateless society or you are just a stalinist

Nope.

1. So tell me, IS Israel committing apartheid against Palestinians or not? I am not talking about Jews here, but Israelis. The reason I ask is that you come across as a very pro Israel person (rather than a pro jew) because you drive this anti antisemitism thing WAY overboard. But seriously, answer this question, is Israel committing apartheid against Palestinians or not.

Oh course it is. Why this is relevant to your enquiries is beyond me. (hint hint: checking tendencies in top right corner can yield interesting results).

2. Show me ANY official anti semitic quote made by a Zeitgeist as a movement. ANY. If our quote does not contain anything antisemitic in it, then we are not antisemitic. As simple as that. If doing so makes us antisemitic, then YOU using medicine would make you an animal torturer.

Point one: look back and see where I say that I don't believe Zeitgeisters to be anti-semites, but that their political worldview cannot be separated from the anti-semitism of the protocols.

Point two: This is akin to saying the Conservatives aren't a racist party because they haven't said anything in their manifesto that's directly racist.

See, this is really fun and all, but I've just received a text commanding me to go out, get drunk and obviously be a big Stalinist and animal torturer, so I'm going to have to leave it here for now. I'll reply to the rest of your post tomorrow at some point, because there's a couple of crackers I'm dying to reply to (I am an 'antimuslimist' now I see. Is that even a word?)

robbo203

28th September 2013, 00:29

I think I did. As mentioned earlier this link is particularly useful at arguing that the majority of Zeitgeist theory is lifted directly from the Protocols (http://socialistunity.com/zeitgeist-exposed/). It is far more expansive than my humble posts so far. I know this is a lazy response, perhaps, to your question, but if necessary I'll try to expand further at some point, maybe tomorrow.

Sorry, but I just dont find this link particularly useful at all in addressing the question I raised. What the aritcle suggests is that there is a similarity in the structure of argumentation employed by the film "Zeitgeist: The Movie" and the book The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. There may be something in this although it could also be a case of selective reading to fit a preconceived idea. I cannot pass comment as I have neither seen the film nor read the book.

But let us for the sake of argument say you are right - what then? Correlation does not signify causation. Yet this is what article you linked to wants to suggest. It claims several times that something mentioned in the move was "lifted" from book. Consider this excerpt from the article

There is a section in the film in which it is claimed that the justifications for America going into a number of world wars were orchestrated by “men behind the government.” We are told that the sinking of the Lusitania was planned, that the Gulf of Tonkin Incident never happened, that Pearl Harbour was known about well in advance, and of course that 9/11 was an inside job. We are told that both sides of conflicts have been funded by the same “international bankers.” This section of the film is lifted directly from Protocol 7, which reads, “Throughout all of Europe, and by means of relations in Europe, in other continents also, we must create ferments, discords, and hostility. Therein we gain a double advantage. In the first place we keep in check all countries, for they well know that we have the power whenever we like to create disorders and to restore order… We must be in a position to respond to every act of opposition by war with the neighbours of that country which dares to oppose us: but if these neighbours should also venture to stand collectively against us, then we must offer resistance by universal war.”

I find this very weak and purely speculative. Why must what the film says have been "lifted directly" from the book? Could not what the film says have derived from some other source entirely or even, dare I say it, be based on demonstrable fact. There have, after all, been confimed cases where weapons from a particular country have gone to both sides involved in a civil war. This was the case, for instance, with Amercian weaponry and training in the Congo cicil war during the Clinton Administration. The point is that it is not only anti-semites that engage in conspiracy theories and that anti-semites might be drawing upon a common stock of core ideas that are prevalent amongst consiracy theorists in general

But, above all, what the article completely fails to substantiate is your claim
that "the ideology advocated by Zeitgeist cannot be separated from anti-semitism". This is a patently absurd. Now it may be, for all I know, that some Zeitgeisters are anti-semitic but it does not follow at all that the ideology of Zeitgeist is anti-semitic

You are asserting that Zeitgeisters merely replace the words "world Jewish conspiracy" with "international bankers". How does that make Zeitgeist ideology antisemitic? You would have thought on the face of it that it was quite the opposite - that it was not Jews that are held accountable for this conspracy but "international bankers". It would seem rather strange that an antisemitic outfit would not seek to bring Jewsih people into disrepute by naming and blaming them in their capacity a "Jews"

So I ask you again - where is the direct evidence that Zeitgeist sees Jews ion particular as the agents of this global conspiracy? Saying that it relies on the kind of arguments used by anti semites to rationalise their own conspiratorial view of the world is no argument at all. In fact it smacks of more than a little conspiracy thinking itself

robbo203

28th September 2013, 00:48

OK Ive just spotted this

Point one: look back and see where I say that I don't believe Zeitgeisters to be anti-semites, but that their political worldview cannot be separated from the anti-semitism of the protocols.

Well, if you now say you dont believe Zeitgeisters to be anti-semites then clearly it stands to reason that their political worldview can indeed be separated from the anti-semitism of the protocols. You are trying to attribute antisemitism to individuals who by your own admission are not anti-semitic. Where's the logic in that?

Point two: This is akin to saying the Conservatives aren't a racist party because they haven't said anything in their manifesto that's directly racist.

The comparison doesnt work in this case. If the Conservatives are a racist party that has to be for a reason that has nothing to do with what is stated in their Manifesto. - i.e. that they are a party populated by racists. Not only is there nothing that I am aware of in the literature or Manifesto of the Zeitgeist Movement that indicates it is anti semitic but we are now assured that you "don't believe Zeitgeisters to be anti-semites"

Sam_b

28th September 2013, 17:17

So I ask you again - where is the direct evidence that Zeitgeist sees Jews ion particular as the agents of this global conspiracy?

Have never said this in the entire duration of the debate.

You are trying to attribute antisemitism to individuals who by your own admission are not anti-semitic

Nope.

edwad

28th September 2013, 17:33

I see this discussion has spiraled downward, but I'll leave my 2 cents here before I leave. I looked into TVP a few months ago, and although it was very interesting, it seemed like too much of a work-in-progress to really want to dedicate myself to it. I think the project should actually be done in a marxist context, and get away from the weird technocrat tone that it pushes now. I wouldn't mind living in a society like that, but I think something similar can only be accomplished through communism, not through bourgeois governments all suddenly deciding to hold hands and give up their resources and power to a small group of technocrats so that peace and harmony can be achieved.

I'm a commie and I've heard the "human nature" argument and every other reason why my belief is faulty so I hate to say it, but this seems too idealistic and utopian. if another approach were taken to secure this outcome, then maybe I could accept it, but for now it just seems like a sci-fi utopia that falls apart outside of a vacuum.

robbo203

28th September 2013, 17:42

Have never said this in the entire duration of the debate.

Nope.

Well then I suggest your statement that Zeitgeists "political worldview cannot be separated from the anti-semitism of the protocols" is completely misleading and you should rephrase what you are trying to say. Something that cannot be separated from the antisemitism of the Protocols is by that very fact, antisemitic

RedBen

28th September 2013, 17:46

alot of people here have not looked too deeply into the venus project but have strong opinions. everything you need to know about it can be heard from jacques own mouth. i'm not about to go into a long knock down drag out argument here. too much to cover, even aside from what has been said already. the venus project is not a bad thing, quite the opposite and it does not equal zeitgeist. the two are separate entities. alot of people keep referring to them as if they were the same, they are not. again, everything you need to know about TVP can be heard from jacque himself.

ckaihatsu

29th September 2013, 20:00

Focusing-in-on and building-on the *crux* of The Venus Project, it may be useful to revisit the concept of a 'resource based economy'.

I'll add to my comments from post #33 and assert that, however abundant any good or service may be (consider the ease of sending out electronic messages today), there will always be a 'horizon' of to-be-developed technologies that, then, necessarily require human attention and labor of some kind.

Not-fully-developed technologies, then, would be *limited*, or "scarce", resources, and could not just summarily be 'evenly distributed' to 'everyone', per the approach of the resource based economy. Such a formulaic / algorithmic treatment of limited resources *would* beg the labor question, and liberated-labor's own consciousness and self-determination.

synthesis

29th September 2013, 22:49

Well then I suggest your statement that Zeitgeists "political worldview cannot be separated from the anti-semitism of the protocols" is completely misleading and you should rephrase what you are trying to say. Something that cannot be separated from the antisemitism of the Protocols is by that very fact, antisemitic

What you and the other defenders of TVP/Zeitgeism (sorry) are missing is that "anti-Semitic" is not being used here as a simple slur intended to deprecate those ideas by any means available. They use a narrative that is rooted not just in anti-Semitic politics but in worldviews that are entirely based on anti-Semitism and have relatively recently learned to use "code words" to make their ideas more palatable.

If you heard someone in the U.S. talking about "thugs and gangbangers coming to rape your wife," would you really have to demand proof beyond a reasonable doubt that they are utilizing a narrative founded upon racist fearmongering against black people and Latinos?

RedBen

29th September 2013, 23:21

synthesis

29th September 2013, 23:27

you don't understand the venus project. not = zeitgest. i suggest you look into it more

Honestly, I don't really give a shit. Based on this thread alone - where even its most ardent defenders have failed to make a good case for how it is both superior to and different from Marxism, other than being technocratic and utopian and avoiding working class politics - the TVP seems like as pointless a repackaging of old leftist ideas as Zeitgeist is for old right-wing ideas. Their (former?) association with Zeitgeist appears to do nothing more than demonstrate their lack of ideological clarity.

robbo203

29th September 2013, 23:59

What you and the other defenders of TVP/Zeitgeism (sorry) are missing is that "anti-Semitic" is not being used here as a simple slur intended to deprecate those ideas by any means available. They use a narrative that is rooted not just in anti-Semitic politics but in worldviews that are entirely based on anti-Semitism and have relatively recently learned to use "code words" to make their ideas more palatable.

If you heard someone in the U.S. talking about "thugs and gangbangers coming to rape your wife," would you really have to demand proof beyond a reasonable doubt that they are utilizing a narrative founded upon racist fearmongering against black people and Latinos?

First of all Im not actually a member or supporter of TVP/Zeitgeist. I have little more than a fairly superficial knowlege of them as I have made clear. I am willing to listen to both sides of this argument but am not willing to relinguish my critical faculties and just passively accept sweeping pop-sociological type statements by Sam-b ("their political worldview cannot be separated from the anti-semitism of the protocols") or you ("They use a narrative that is rooted not just in anti-Semitic politics but in worldviews that are entirely based on anti-Semitism.)

You dont seem to grasp the simple point Im making. The "narrative" they supposedly employ (what - the movement as a whole or just one or two prominent members?) may well be based on a conspiratorial view of the world and anti-semites may likewise engage in a narrative that is similiarly conspiratorial in nature but it does not follow therefore that TZM itself is anti-semitic in outlook. This is crass logic . Its like saying a cat is an animal and a dog is animal therefore a dog is cat.

You dont seem to be aware, either of you, that this IS what you are both saying even if it is not what you might have intended to say. In your case, how can you possibly say they use a narrative rooted in worldviews "that are entirely based on anti-semitism" and deny that you are charging them with antisemitisim? If the worldview is entirely antisemitic then the narrative on which it is based must likewise be antisemitic. That stands to reason. Otherwise you would be making a meaningless statement. If you said instead that they use a narrative that antisemitism also bases itself on then we would have an entirely different story. Then I might consider what you are saying to be possibly more acceptable.

But thats not what you are saying and since you are seemingly hellbent on wanting to smear TZM with the charge of antisemitism I have to ask again - where is your factual evdience to back up this claim? Sam-b has admitted that he does not think TZM has ever said Jews are the agents of a global conspiracy. Do you?

RedBen

30th September 2013, 00:02

Honestly, I don't really give a shit. Based on this thread alone - where even its most ardent defenders have failed to make a good case for how it is both superior to and different from Marxism, other than being technocratic and utopian and avoiding working class politics - the TVP seems like as pointless a repackaging of old leftist ideas as Zeitgeist is for old right-wing ideas. Their (former?) association with Zeitgeist appears to do nothing more than demonstrate their lack of ideological clarity.
you gave a shit enough to comment without enough info for even a cursory understanding of what you were talking about. i make a few posts about people not being informed and you shit out of your mouth as if to prove my point. i'm glad you can't be bothered to investigate, you can just judge things based one some half assed internet forum critiques. i see you are some supreme being who can judge things without all the information required. i stand in awe of your abilities. but then if i was as self important as you i might also comment on things and then counter arguments with "well, i can't be bothered to look into it" like you do.

synthesis

30th September 2013, 00:03

rage

I'm not denying that I'm charging them with anti-Semitism, although in my mind I don't think I am. I'm saying that it's not the simple slur that you make it out to be. It doesn't matter what its individual adherents believe, or claim to believe, if their worldview is shaped by a narrative that is fundamentally anti-Semitic.

synthesis

30th September 2013, 00:08

RAGE

First, I would argue that it is not my job to convince myself why I should give a shit about something. Regardless of whether or not you believe this to be true, I think you're missing the point in that I was not actively disparaging this "Venus Project" in that post - I was merely trying to clarify what I thought (and still think) is a major misunderstanding of why the word "anti-Semitism" is being used here.

RedBen

30th September 2013, 00:11

First, I would argue that it is not my job to convince myself why I should give a shit about something. Regardless of whether or not you believe this to be true, I think you're missing the point in that I was not actively disparaging this "Venus Project" in that post - I was merely trying to clarify what I thought (and still think) is a major misunderstanding of why the word "anti-Semitism" is being used here.
you haven't proven anything other than you don't know what you are talking about. the venus prject is not the zeitgeist movement, if you think tvp is anti semitic, you don't know anything about it. again, shitting out of your mouth. may i offer you a mint?

synthesis

30th September 2013, 00:40

so much rage

If all you're taking from this is that "TVP is anti-Semitic," then there's either a communication failure on my part or a literacy failure on your part. I'm honestly not sure which it is. I do believe, however, that this is the first time someone has angrily quoted me in their signature, which makes me feel validated.

Sam_b

30th September 2013, 01:10

Wait a minute, but...

Marxist Leninist, i believe in the working class owning the means of production, "dictatorship of the proletariat" meaning rule of the working class, and vanguardism, or a very class conscious people who educate, and defend from counter revolutionaries through education, or any other means.

Why are you now suddenly supporting The Venus Project on here? I think it's been pretty conclusive that TVP advocates a distribution model headed up by a class of specialists and not by the working class itself.

tuwix

30th September 2013, 09:03

Wait a minute, but...

I think it's been pretty conclusive that TVP advocates a distribution model headed up by a class of specialists and not by the working class itself.

Not by class of specialist, but by artificial inteligence based on scientific method.

It seems obvious that the most to say in this thread about the Venus Project have ones who know the least about it. Confusing the Venus Project and the Zeitgeist Movement is the best example of that.

RedBen

30th September 2013, 09:20

Wait a minute, but...

Why are you now suddenly supporting The Venus Project on here? I think it's been pretty conclusive that TVP advocates a distribution model headed up by a class of specialists and not by the working class itself.
i hate to break it to you, scientists and engineers shape our society. this computer i'm using to communicate is a prime example of that. tvp stress technology to improve the lives of everyone, without money. tvp is not perfect but it's also not a bad thing. i'm not against alternatives to society just because they are not in line exclusively with ML, and i try to keep an open mind, that's not contradictorial, it just means i'm not hyper sectarian.

TAEHSAEN

30th September 2013, 11:01

Not by class of specialist, but by artificial inteligence based on scientific method.

It seems obvious that the most to say in this thread about the Venus Project have ones who know the least about it. Confusing the Venus Project and the Zeitgeist Movement is the best example of that.

I'm sorry that you misunderstood me. The reason I used TVP and Zeitgeist interchangeably is because they advocate the same thing which is the Resource Based Economy (model).

Also the mistake many anti-TVP people are making here is that they are assuming that TVP's critique of capitalism is a central part of their theory. Its not. The critique of capitalism is a supplementary thing that reinforces WHY their system is a better one than capitalism.

But in all honesty there's no need to be hostile here because TVP / Zeitgeist are both egalitarian organizations and there is no hatred in either of them.

Moreover, I believe the the final form of Communism and the final form of RBE will be the same (with the allocation of resources via scientific method being the ONLY difference) and I believe we can all hold hands now and work it out later on when we actually get there :)

Jimmie Higgins

30th September 2013, 12:48

i hate to break it to you, scientists and engineers shape our society.No, not really. They tend to think they do - as many professionals do - and they tend to think they exist outside of society, but really technology and engineering are shaped and bent to the needs of capital in both privite institutions and state institutions (universities mainly).

Fabian-socialists and middle class utopians are drawn to these kinds of utopian schemes as if reason and knowledge (or lack of) were the reasons for the problems of society when really it's class rule and the profit system and all the problems that go along with these things. For example, capitalists don't lack access to information about how fossil fuels are causing havok and even undermine the stability of their own profit-making. But "irrationally" they will be compelled to use cheap fuel for as long as it is profitable in the short-term.

For science and technology to benifit everyone, there can't be class rule by a small group of exploiters who fund and promote the directions of scientific discovery and application which suit them. Working class self-emancipation is necissary to make science and technology something that really benifits everyone. It's a problem of class, not a problem of lack of knowledge or reason.

tuwix

30th September 2013, 12:57

I'm sorry that you misunderstood me. The reason I used TVP and Zeitgeist interchangeably is because they advocate the same thing which is the Resource Based Economy (model).

It wasn't specifically directed to you. It was directed to many of ones who critisize the most. Likely, they even don't know that Zeitgeist series isn't part the of TZM ideology as many other things...

ckaihatsu

30th September 2013, 23:16

[TVP advocates a distribution model headed up] Not by class of specialist, but by artificial inteligence based on scientific method.

As a sidenote, what most people think of when they think 'artificial intelligence' is actually an *expert system*, like one that beats the human race at chess.

Typically, the problem area [for an expert system] is complex enough that a more simple traditional algorithm cannot provide a proper solution. The foundation of a successful expert system depends on a series of technical procedures and development that may be designed by technicians and related experts. As such, expert systems do not typically provide a definitive answer, but provide probabilistic recommendations.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expert_system#Examples_of_applications

So I bring this up in order to say that we shouldn't look outside of mass humanity to both *define* our (social) problems, and to *solve* them.

The 'finer points' of social life could all-too-easily be *defined* by technocrats and/or their technological expert systems, thereby creating the prevailing and dominant narratives of social life for *all* of us -- if we *let* them.

The question of civilization itself doesn't require a *technical* approach, so that's the wrong foot to lead with -- we should never be so ready to abdicate our own sovereignty as co-participants in the ongoing (re-)creation of society, by forfeiting that birthright to a "specialist".