The Zeitgeist movement

[Dimentio]

Interesting organisation. They are basically re-inventing the wheel a little, and stand where the socialists stood about 1840.

http://thezeitgeistmovement.com

On the positive note, its seems to be a very dynamic organisation.

[Woland]

Its a bit of a joke:


Q:How does The Venus Project compare with Communism?

A:Communism used money and labor, had social stratification, and elected officials to maintain the communists' traditions. Most importantly, Communism did not eliminate SCARCITY nor did they have a blueprint or the methods for the production of abundance. Machine production rather than labor will dominate the future. Perhaps through no fault of their own, they also had to maintain huge military expenditures to protect themselves from invasion of fascistic and capitalistic institutions.

Communism being similar to a resource-based economy or The Venus Project is an erroneous concept. Communism has money, banks, armies, police, prisons, charismatic personalities, social stratification, and is managed by appointed leaders. The Venus Project's aim is to surpass the need for the use of money. Police, prisons and the military would no longer be necessary when goods, services, healthcare, and education are available to all people. The Venus Project would replace politicians with a cybernated society in which all of the physical entities are managed and operated by computerized systems. The only region that the computers do not operate or manage is the surveillance of human beings. This would be completely unnecessary and considered socially offensive. A society that uses technology without human concern has no basis of survival. Communism has no blueprint or methodology to carry out their ideals and along with capitalism, fascism, and socialism, will ultimately go down in history as failed social experiments.

I guess some people would like communism just if it wasnt called ''communism''...But nice try at distancing yourself and completely misunderstaning it.

[Dimentio]

Well, if they replaced the word communism with "stalinism", it would have more meaning. Remember how most Americans view communism?

[Woland]

I guess I am a bit sad that communism earned such a great reputation that it now has to work incognito :laugh:

[Dimentio]

I think that's the case in North America.

[Woland]

But I really hope the founders are not so ignorant about Marxism. Because then, they just reinvented communism for themselves...without knowing its already there and now they are getting lots of support...oh well. Marx should have gotten a copyright even if its totally counterrevolutionary.

Besides, even if the result is the same, I got some nostalgia for the red stars and stuff :(

[Dimentio]

I am mostly irritated at the third of the Zeitgeist movement composed of new age nuts and tinfoil hats.

[Kassad]

"Good morning, bourgeoisie rulers. We are the Zeitgeist Movement and we would like you to kindly step aside so we can destroy all your plans for profit, all your dominance over the working class and promote prosperity based on technology. We hope this doesn't bother you."

That's pretty much how The Zeitgeist Movement sounds once you've elaborated on it. People who think that the revolution is just going to happen and nothing potentially bad could come out of it (meaning, the people in power are not just going to give up. After the October Revolution, did the conservatives and bourgeoisie just give up? No.). It's a great idea and a potentially powerful front, but Peter Joseph had the ability to advocate a social movement based on logic. Instead, it has turned into nothing but a very broad and simplistic view of society. For shame.

[Dimentio]

"Good morning, bourgeoisie rulers. We are the Zeitgeist Movement and we would like you to kindly step aside so we can destroy all your plans for profit, all your dominance over the working class and promote prosperity based on technology. We hope this doesn't bother you."

That's pretty much how The Zeitgeist Movement sounds once you've elaborated on it. People who think that the revolution is just going to happen and nothing potentially bad could come out of it (meaning, the people in power are not just going to give up. After the October Revolution, did the conservatives and bourgeoisie just give up? No.). It's a great idea and a potentially powerful front, but Peter Joseph had the ability to advocate a social movement based on logic. Instead, it has turned into nothing but a very broad and simplistic view of society. For shame.

I still think that the reception by so many has shown that people in the USA are tired of the system. Bolshevism in Russia was affected by the situation during that time and in that particular country. American left-wing revolutionaries sprung up from the ZG movement are a genuinely American reaction against the system, as much as the social revolutionaries and the Russian bolsheviks were a genuine reaction of that time and place.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VaB1psXTjS4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3u3JSEqNtlg

I'll bet that if a revolutionary mass movement springs up in the USA, that it will be based around tinfoil-conspirationism mixtured with utopianism.

[GPDP]

It basically sounds like anarchist communism/technocracy to me. They just don't want to say it, or they're incredibly ignorant about what communism actually is.

[Raúl Duke]

It basically sounds like anarchist communism/technocracy to me. They just don't want to say it, or they're incredibly ignorant about what communism actually is.

That's exactly what I thought when I saw the 2nd movie.


I'll bet that if a revolutionary mass movement springs up in the USA, that it will be based around tinfoil-conspirationism mixtured with utopianism.

I have my doubts.

After all there is a "movement" of conspiracy theorists and they basically lean (or leaned) towards libertarianism/Ron Paul and sometimes certain figures in the conspiracy theorist movement are off-putting the the public and even those with leftist tendencies or outright leftists.

[GPDP]

So... should we sign up and tell them what we think?

[Woland]

So... should we sign up and tell them what we think?

Yeah, that'd be great ^ ^ Break it to them that their system has been suggested already 150 years ago by a man named Marx...

Anyway, all those tinfoil hat-wearers can do is criticize but never offer an alternative. So they are destined to fail. Besides the fact that no-one takes them seriously anyway.

[Jazzratt]

I've encountered people into this and they seem reasonable, if misguided. A lot of their ideas are unscientific and utopian and they have allowed the rot of 9/11 conspiracy theories and moralistic attacks on bourgeois order (in the place of reasoned attacks) to set in. They seem to be a better "breeding ground" for actual leftist cadres rather than any sort of genuine philosophically leftist group.

[Dimentio]

I've encountered people into this and they seem reasonable, if misguided. A lot of their ideas are unscientific and utopian and they have allowed the rot of 9/11 conspiracy theories and moralistic attacks on bourgeois order (in the place of reasoned attacks) to set in. They seem to be a better "breeding ground" for actual leftist cadres rather than any sort of genuine philosophically leftist group.

Yes, it seems like that. And apart from being an evidence of the degeneration of the US education since the 70;s, they are quite genuine and quite ready to go to insane lengths to fight the powers that be.

To make a change in the USA, the American radical left would need the rural working class which tend to believe things about the NWO, Illuminati and 9/11 conspiracy theories.

It seems like at least one leftist group is making incursions in that segment of the population.

Maybe time to analyse the Zeitgeist documentaries and see how their style of presentation differs from the "legitime" left and why they have had such a breakthrough in the USA?

[Black Sheep]

this documentary is stunning on non-political minds.

A friend of mine told me some days ago that he was crazy about that film,he had copied it a dozen times and he was giving it away :lol:

And then i told him 'well,the resource based economy the film describes is communism you know' and he started yelling 'will u stop about that crap already!' and stuff.

lol:laugh:

[Guerrilla22]

Is Alex Jones the head of this movement?

[Dimentio]

Is Alex Jones the head of this movement?

No, he had described the Zeitgeist movement as a NWO scam.

[bellyscratch]

I have a friend who is in to this Zeitgeist stuff as well as all the Alex Jones stuff too, who describes himself as a libertarian, and at the moment is trying to pull off scams so he doesn't have to pay bills or mortgage because of some 'liberty and wealth' website he joined up to for £500.

There's also another guy into the same stuff, who was interested in joining the SWP, then after he came across someone he didnt like in the party (to be fair the guy who put him off has pissed me off a fair bit too) thought there could be 'good capitalism for the people' and then a month later he started calling himself an anarchist, yet doesn't seem to get involved with anything but the no2ID campaign and talking on the internet.

I'd be up for invading one of these forums with a group of people in some sort of Internet based united front, to knock some sense into these people and reveal some truths about communism

[Kassad]

Alex Jones is a right-wing populist and he is an enemy of the working class, along with everything we stand for. He has called The Zeitgeist Movement new world order propaganda and had a nice immature debate with Peter Joseph on his show a month or so back.

[Dust Bunnies]

Haha, love tin foilists, when I first watched the zeitgeist video (federal reserve part) I totally bought it and loved it. Hollywood should make a movie called Zeitgeist: THE MOVIE IN TIN.

[Kassad]

The level of contradictions are enormous. He argues against the income tax in the first one, yet wants to create a technologically-based innovative sovciety. And this society is just supposed to sprout out of the ground? No. It's going to take a lot of money, detective.

Peter Joseph presents a surrealist view of the world with The Zeitgeist Movement. He pays no attention to the class struggle and that's where his argument falls apart.

[GPDP]

That's why I consider him and his movement to be something along the lines of modern-day utopian socialists.

Still, there's potential here, I won't deny that. But again, their heads seem to be mostly in the clouds.

[Reclaimed Dasein]

I got the impression from the first movie they were a bunch of libertarians for going back to the gold standard. Maybe I should give them another shot.

[Guerrilla22]

No, he had described the Zeitgeist movement as a NWO scam.

LOL! I don't think Alex Jones trust anyone at all.

[Black Sheep]

Well if any comrades from here post in the forum and explain what communism is (and that the zeitgeist is in fact an anarchocommunist propaganda film) let us know the forum's reaction:D

[Dimentio]

I have a friend who is in to this Zeitgeist stuff as well as all the Alex Jones stuff too, who describes himself as a libertarian, and at the moment is trying to pull off scams so he doesn't have to pay bills or mortgage because of some 'liberty and wealth' website he joined up to for £500.

There's also another guy into the same stuff, who was interested in joining the SWP, then after he came across someone he didnt like in the party (to be fair the guy who put him off has pissed me off a fair bit too) thought there could be 'good capitalism for the people' and then a month later he started calling himself an anarchist, yet doesn't seem to get involved with anything but the no2ID campaign and talking on the internet.

I'd be up for invading one of these forums with a group of people in some sort of Internet based united front, to knock some sense into these people and reveal some truths about communism

I don't think their brainwaves are tuned on that frequence.

[Kassad]

It isn't even Anarcho-Communism. Peter Joseph and his followers are convinced that the destruction of the system will just happen and out of it, will rise a resource-based economy controlled by the people. No intermediate steps, no real set process. It's utopian surrealism.

[Dimentio]

It isn't even Anarcho-Communism. Peter Joseph and his followers are convinced that the destruction of the system will just happen and out of it, will rise a resource-based economy controlled by the people. No intermediate steps, no real set process. It's utopian surrealism.

Yes, I agree there.

[TC]

An inability to distinguish real political organizations from internet crackpots is probably a sign of not enough time in the real movement and too much time online.

[Dimentio]

An inability to distinguish real political organizations from internet crackpots is probably a sign of not enough time in the real movement and too much time online.

Given that there has been over 2000 Zeitgeist events in around 70 countries until now, I would say that it is a significant current.

[Zurdito]

argh, what a horrible film.

excuse the subsequent rant:

I have met two people in real life who were into the idea of Zeitgeist and Venus project, and they were both anti-working class elitists and moralists who heeld the masses in contempt and think we need to be saved by some enlightened geniuses.

Really, a film which proposes the a cabal of bankers manipulates the global economy for its own ends and controls all times of crisis and growth, in order to create a single world government and break down oh so precious US sovereignity by merging them with the Mexicans and Canadians etc., a film which fantasises about all of humanity having chips placed in us, a film which appeals to people to get "angry" about crime of all issues (citing events in the US suburbs and the way the middle classes are afraid to go outside), a film which shows a slideshow of the "good guys" who "we" killed because "we" just weren't ready for their message, and included amongst the good guys John Lennon, Ghandi and JFK, a film which claims that religion, nationality and class are all issues invented to divide and conquer us, really is one reactionary pile of shit of no use to the working class or left, first-worldist, middle class crap whoch gives no agency at all to the hundreds of millions of superexploited workers around the world.

"soon all of humanity will have a chip, and you will ask for it", etc. It is pretty clear here that "all of humanity" means "middle America" and that this really is the only sector which this film adresses or places any hope in (unless you can imagine the Chinese or Indian or African or Latin American working classes all demanding and being implanted with chips anytime soon...I can't)

[Zurdito]

and to add in a more scientific sense, that Marx and Engels already defined in the Communist Manifesto this phenomeon: petit bourgeois socialism.

these people on the one had fear expropriation by the capitalists, and on the other by the working class. hence thier paranoid fantasies about some united "corporate-communist" plot for one world government, etc. To them a workers state is as evil as capitalism, and the two are the same.

[Dimentio]

The Z movement is really a mixture of several different movements. Some which are insane and some which it is possible to speak with. As for the Venus Project - while I am certainly critical of its lack of a design and actual implementation plans - it is very much older than the Zeitgeist Movement. I think it is a great vision of how a post-capitalist society might look like. Moreover, the Zeitgeist Movement has increased the interest in social organisations which are actually trying to make a chance ten-fold.

[Honggweilo]

Zeitsgeist the Movie = Thomas Moore's Utopia for the 21st Century

Zeitgeist Movement = Utopian Socialism

[Honggweilo]

That said i rather have Zeitgeisters then alex jones groupies

[Dimentio]

Zeitsgeist the Movie = Thomas Moore's Utopia for the 21st Century

Zeitgeist Movement = Utopian Socialism

Yes, I agree with that. I think it will collapse by the end of 2009.

[GPDP]

So, has anyone approached them about any of this, particularly their ridiculous notion that communism is a monetary-based system?

[couch13]

I just did. Here's what I wrote:
When I watched Zeitgeist Addenum, as well as when I read the FAQ, I ran into something rather suprising. I found that Communism was defined as a monetary system that was based around scarcity. This is simpily not true. In fact, the Venus Project's resource based economy is exactly what Karl Marx was advocating. He argued that a communist society is a stateless society in which people work for the common good which is to be made possible by technonlogy eliminating scarcity. In other words, the Venus Project is advocating the creation of an actual communist society (not some dictatorship that claims to be communist).
The only difference that I see, is that Marx offered a road in which communism can be achieved; I have yet to see a road to that which the Venus Project is proposing. While Marx directly said that the workers must stand up and destroy the state as is and to implament a workers state, in which the workers would democraticly run society until it is ready for the state to wither away. By the way, this is an international revolution, it can't happen in one country.
Because of this lack of a tranistion program, you are actually more related to the Utopian Socialists who came before Marx (Robert Owen, Charles Fourier, etc) who believed that such a society could just come into existance. Therefore you are a form of Utopian Socialism, which means that you believe (in an unscientific manner I might add) that monentary systems will just change into resource based systems. The ruling class isn't willing to give up its power that easily. Revolution is required.
WORKERS OF THE WORLD, UNITE!

I'll check to see if I get any responses tomorrow.

[Dimentio]

TVP is mostly focused on creating a community to "show" people that it is possible, as far as my impressions of them might be correct. NET is more focusing on creating networks in Mondragon-style.

[JimmyJazz]

I got the impression from the first movie they were a bunch of libertarians for going back to the gold standard. Maybe I should give them another shot.

A Ron Paul-loving buddy of mine told me I should watch it, so you're probably right.

Not really sure how to reconcile that with what is being said in this thread. I guess I will have to watch the damn thing.

[Yazman]

It blows me away that it hasn't occurred to you that when they say "communism" they are not referring to "our" communism but the mainstream, Cold War "communism" - i.e. soviet union, north korea, etc.

There is nothing utopian about movements that do not call for intermediary phases or transitions, in fact I feel such transitions lead to warped degenerated societies or in many cases simply back to capitalism. Why transition? There is no need to when one can just begin implementing new structures and systems.

[Kassad]

It blows me away that it hasn't occurred to you that when they say "communism" they are not referring to "our" communism but the mainstream, Cold War "communism" - i.e. soviet union, north korea, etc.

There is nothing utopian about movements that do not call for intermediary phases or transitions, in fact I feel such transitions lead to warped degenerated societies or in many cases simply back to capitalism. Why transition? There is no need to when one can just begin implementing new structures and systems.

So we're left to assume that there will be no void to fill after the destruction of the bourgeoisie state? There will be no counterrevolutionary measures? This is almost surreal. I understand that we would wish to make a transition 'stage' as short as possible in the transfer between bourgeoisie capitalism to communism, but it's utopian to assume that the bourgeoisie state will crumble and out of the ashes will rise an already organized, proper and stable proletariat-ruled socialism.

[Dimentio]

So we're left to assume that there will be no void to fill after the destruction of the bourgeoisie state? There will be no counterrevolutionary measures? This is almost surreal. I understand that we would wish to make a transition 'stage' as short as possible in the transfer between bourgeoisie capitalism to communism, but it's utopian to assume that the bourgeoisie state will crumble and out of the ashes will rise an already organization, proper and stable proletariat-ruled socialism.

6 months.

[Some Red Guy]

Yazman is right, I've listened to a LOT of conspiracy lectures and they are all talking about Stalinist regimes, calling it "communism". Really annoying.

The Z movement are a lot better than Alex Jones and his crowd, right-wing libertarian religious nuts. Jones doesn't like the movie, calling it Illuminati propaganda.

You guys know they are making a third movie, it will be about psychology. I heard it will prove the competative capitalist mindset as something humans learn trough llife, not something they are born with. Considering how many people will be seing it it could be of good help to the left. With the "human nature" argument disarmed we could gain a lot of new followers.

[Kassad]

Definitely. The human nature argument is the prime argument from capitalist sympathizers and the laissez-faire capitalists. It's just a shame that Peter Joseph is wasting his potential energy on a utopian socialist ideology when he could advocate workers rights and support emancipation through class struggle. Instead, he is becoming divisive and manipulating language to make it seem like he is anti-communist, when in truth, that is exactly what he is advocating; revolutionary socialist system. Well, at least it's a step away from the right-wing libertarian motives behind the first movie, such as advocating the gold standard and the abolition of the income tax. At least he's coming around.

[Dimentio]

Definitely. The human nature argument is the prime argument from capitalist sympathizers and the laissez-faire capitalists. It's just a shame that Peter Joseph is wasting his potential energy on a utopian socialist ideology when he could advocate workers rights and support emancipation through class struggle. Instead, he is becoming divisive and manipulating language to make it seem like he is anti-communist, when in truth, that is exactly what he is advocating; revolutionary socialist system. Well, at least it's a step away from the right-wing libertarian motives behind the first movie, such as advocating the gold standard and the abolition of the income tax. At least he's coming around.

Marxist-leninist aesthetics are dead. To uphold Lenin, Stalin or even Trotsky is detrimental to social change. People will dislike it and not even understand it. If the only way to make communism come through is to call it "libertarianism", then we will have to call it "libertarianism".

[Kassad]

Marxist-leninist aesthetics are dead. To uphold Lenin, Stalin or even Trotsky is detrimental to social change. People will dislike it and not even understand it. If the only way to make communism come through is to call it "libertarianism", then we will have to call it "libertarianism".

Well, those who are willing to listen, will listen. Those who, maybe, at the current time will not listen, will listen when it is their wallet in peril. When those who thought they were sustainable and well-off find themselves being eaten alive by the crisis, alternatives will be offered. The only way to educate people is through theory, practice and education, which can come directly from the teachings of Marx and Lenin. Plus, calling it "libertarianism" isn't going to happen, at least not in the United States. The right-wing populists have claimed that term and it is synonymous with laissez-faire capitalism and free trade.

The consistent demonization of the term 'socialism' will not last. During the Great Depression, Roosevelt's reformist policies were actually a spark for some of the largest workers movements and rallies under Communist Party USA. When reformism and capitalism continue to fail, people will seek alternatives. We will provide them.

[Dimentio]

The problem is not so much your theories as what people think about your theories and your previous leader, which you for some odd psychological reason are still carrying around the portraits of. If I was a ML, I would try to hide Lenin and Stalin somewhere inside the wardrobe while still talking about Lenin's theories without referring to Lenin explicitly.

[Kassad]

The problem is not so much your theories as what people think about your theories and your previous leader, which you for some odd psychological reason are still carrying around the portraits of. If I was a ML, I would try to hide Lenin and Stalin somewhere inside the wardrobe while still talking about Lenin's theories without referring to Lenin explicitly.

Are you insinuating that we should completely ignore the concepts and theories of Lenin and the Bolshevik Revolution because it is unpopular? Thanks, I'll stick to my dignity and I won't hide because bourgeois propaganda has managed to paint a revolutionary leader like Lenin as an authoritarian fascist without any real source, justification or reason besides echoing the usual corporate lines that peak profits while workers suffer.

Also, where are people carrying portraits? At the rallies I attend, the only face you see on signs and flags is that of Che Guevara. The only Lenin you see is on books or pamphlets that the assorted groups are trying to distribute.

[Dimentio]

Not ignore the concepts and theories, just scrap the Lenin posters.

And the Guevara posters as well.

Unless you happen to live in a third world country. Lenin is more popular there as a meme than he is impopular.

[couch13]

Here's the reply I got with my response.

Tecknixia wrote:

Hmm, interesting, does anyone disagree? I have not read Karl Marx, so I can't say "this is true" or "this is not true".
I do have one thing to say though. Jacque Fresco didn't say it would "just happen", he said that the world's financial systems would HAVE to collapse for this to happen, and when/if it does, then something like The Venus Project could be proposed as a new way of doing things. He says that the financial systems could collapse due to the continual application of automated systems in the workplace which would replace workers, then when more and more people lose their jobs the people will not have the purchasing power anymore and that would cause the collapse.
Personally, I think it's going to have to be a combination of that, and people in powerful positions who believe in the shared resource idea. Otherwise it's going to be set back up the way the people in powerful positions are going to want it set back up.

Fresco's idea is severly flawed. When the system collapses (as it does on a rather frequent basis I might add; 1870's, 1930's, 1970's and now) it recovers itself by changing its practices and creating a new set of jobs and cheaper products. The only way for the monentary system to collapse and be replaced by a resource based economy would be for the workers, during one of these periods of collapse, to rise up and seize both the state apparatus and the economic centers and assume democratic control of the systems.
In addition, the vast majority of power elites will never give up their positions of power to ordinary people. Counter-revolution is an ineveitable part of this equation, but the counter-revolution can be crushed by the revolutionary workers fighting for their right to equality.

[couch13]

I don't feel like copying and pasting arguments anymore. Go to the forum if you're interested. I can't post links, but the thread is called Error in Definition.

[couch13]

Not ignore the concepts and theories, just scrap the Lenin posters.

And the Guevara posters as well.

Unless you happen to live in a third world country. Lenin is more popular there as a meme than he is impopular.

I have no trouble with Lenin's popularity these days. People seem to be opening up.

[Black Dagger]

Are these people the same ones who made that doco Zeitgeist? Or whatever, about how 911 was an inside job, the catholic church is bad and the world is ruled by a conspiracy of banks?

[couch13]

Are these people the same ones who made that doco Zeitgeist? Or whatever, about how 911 was an inside job, the catholic church is bad and the world is ruled by a conspiracy of banks?

Yes, they made a second one.

[Qayin]

I dont see how many leftists write off some of this information as nutty

The federal reserve really needs to be dismantled
and 9-11 has huge holes in it
and the modern day bourgeoisie do seem to be in a hurry to clamp
down upon us. Just think yesterday IBM provided the nazis with computers to
tag the jews,and today they invest in implantable RFID chips.

[Kassad]

I dont see how many leftists write off some of this information as nutty

The federal reserve really needs to be dismantled
and 9-11 has huge holes in it
and the modern day bourgeoisie do seem to be in a hurry to clamp
down upon us. Just think yesterday IBM provided the nazis with computers to
tag the jews,and today they invest in implantable RFID chips.

So we should abolish the income tax and bring back the gold standard. Right.

[GPDP]

I dont see how many leftists write off some of this information as nutty

The federal reserve really needs to be dismantled
and 9-11 has huge holes in it
and the modern day bourgeoisie do seem to be in a hurry to clamp
down upon us. Just think yesterday IBM provided the nazis with computers to
tag the jews,and today they invest in implantable RFID chips.

It's not so much the things they bring attention to that's the problem, as much as the conclusions many in the movement come to regarding them. While it certainly is important to question the government and its motives, we should not let these things drive us into the "Austrian" nuthouse.

[Kassad]

Well, Zeitgeist and Zeitgeist: Addendum are totally contradictory. The first movie does everything but totally advocate Austrian Economics, capitalism and anti-working class ideologies such as abolishing the income tax and returning to the gold standard. Addendum advocates a resource-based economy; totally contradictory to the advocacy of the monetary-based system, since it is obvious he is advocating a system if he is referring to taxes. Peter Joseph was, to be blunt, an immature conspiracy theorist who was echoing party and economic lines that are advocated in other documentaries. He has, as of late, begun to advocate a system based on people's needs and resources; the desire to eliminate scarcity being the foremost goal. He still has a long way to go if he wants to truly grasp revolutionary change.

[Dimentio]

Well, Zeitgeist and Zeitgeist: Addendum are totally contradictory. The first movie does everything but totally advocate Austrian Economics, capitalism and anti-working class ideologies such as abolishing the income tax and returning to the gold standard. Addendum advocates a resource-based economy; totally contradictory to the advocacy of the monetary-based system, since it is obvious he is advocating a system if he is referring to taxes. Peter Joseph was, to be blunt, an immature conspiracy theorist who was echoing party and economic lines that are advocated in other documentaries. He has, as of late, begun to advocate a system based on people's needs and resources; the desire to eliminate scarcity being the foremost goal. He still has a long way to go if he wants to truly grasp revolutionary change.

I think at the current material circumstances, the ZG movement is probably the best thing that the USA could get. Its some sort of post-leftist leftist movement which has rejuvenerated the end goals of socialism.

[Qayin]

So we should abolish the income tax and bring back the gold standard. Right.


Never said that but being an anarchist I believe the income tax and capital itself must be abolished.

Most of those movies come from an almost anarcho-capitalist view on things that I find retarded.

These movies want you to trust capitalism and a reformed monetary system but not the state. I cant do any of those

[couch13]

I think at the current material circumstances, the ZG movement is probably the best thing that the USA could get. Its some sort of post-leftist leftist movement which has rejuvenerated the end goals of socialism.

Don't you live in Europe?

From my experiance and other's experiance in my organization, people are open to socialism and communism today. With the economy collapsing and students and workers taking a massive hit, we're becoming way more popular.

[Decolonize The Left]

From my experiance and other's experiance in my organization, people are open to socialism and communism today. With the economy collapsing and students and workers taking a massive hit, we're becoming way more popular.

"Our popularity" is irrelevant as being popular doesn't necessarily translate into anything material.

What is highly relevant is class consciousness, and if the Zeitgeist movement contributes to that (I am skeptical that is does) then it is beneficial.

- August

[Dimentio]

"Our popularity" is irrelevant as being popular doesn't necessarily translate into anything material.

What is highly relevant is class consciousness, and if the Zeitgeist movement contributes to that (I am skeptical that is does) then it is beneficial.

- August

I think it does. It has at least grabbed back some of the critical initiative to the left part of the spectrum. Most social criticism against the USA which had grown since at least 1994 has been pointed from right-wing perspectives.

[Honggweilo]

I think at the current material circumstances, the ZG movement is probably the best thing that the USA could get. Its some sort of post-leftist leftist movement which has rejuvenerated the end goals of socialism.
I think you confuse internet popularity with IRL popularity

[Dimentio]

I think you confuse internet popularity with IRL popularity

There have been 2000 ZG events under 2008 alone.

[Honggweilo]

There have been 2000 ZG events under 2008 alone.
source?

[Kassad]

There have been 2000 ZG events under 2008 alone.

Well, there's two problems with that statement. You're referring to Z-Day, which the second anniversary is coming up for on May 15th. Z-Day is Peter Joseph's self-proclaimed 'Zeitgeist Day' where people organize and discuss, educate and the like for Zeitgeist-related stuff.

Here's the problem. In 2008, Z-Day was organized under the banner of Austrian economics, the gold standard, abolishing the income tax and the like. Though I'm ecstatic to see people rejecting RFID tracking chips, religion and the National ID Card, you're not going to see me support an empirical documentary that advocates deregulatory economics. The people who organized organized under that banner.

Now, some people will say "Just you wait, Kassad. They'll organize even more events after Addendum." That's awesome, but you're missing the point. They're organizing a lot of the same people who were in love with the original Zeitgeist, and you know what that means? Those people are malleable. They see a documentary and they idolize it; doing no real research or fact checking. The conspiracy culture is incredibly dangerous because their opinions fluctuate from day to day. If switching to gold standard economics varies to rejecting the monetary system and capitalism, and people still support it, there is something seriously wrong with this picture.

I love critical thinking. There is a stigma that is attached to all conspiracy theories which makes them naturally rejected, but many of them are likely to be proven true in the future. Still, this culture's opinion consistently varies. They are not a reliable force and they could potentially be turned against us at any time.

[couch13]

"Our popularity" is irrelevant as being popular doesn't necessarily translate into anything material.

What is highly relevant is class consciousness, and if the Zeitgeist movement contributes to that (I am skeptical that is does) then it is beneficial.

- August

Fine, we have people joining at a record rate. People who adhere to our principles and constantly do party building are joining. The class consiousness of the workers is raising as they watch us fight with them at strikes and protests. That work?

[couch13]

I think it does. It has at least grabbed back some of the critical initiative to the left part of the spectrum. Most social criticism against the USA which had grown since at least 1994 has been pointed from right-wing perspectives.

No, most people haven't heard of this movie. People see us fighting for them on many occasions.

[Das war einmal]

Well, Zeitgeist and Zeitgeist: Addendum are totally contradictory. The first movie does everything but totally advocate Austrian Economics, capitalism and anti-working class ideologies such as abolishing the income tax and returning to the gold standard. Addendum advocates a resource-based economy; totally contradictory to the advocacy of the monetary-based system, since it is obvious he is advocating a system if he is referring to taxes. Peter Joseph was, to be blunt, an immature conspiracy theorist who was echoing party and economic lines that are advocated in other documentaries. He has, as of late, begun to advocate a system based on people's needs and resources; the desire to eliminate scarcity being the foremost goal. He still has a long way to go if he wants to truly grasp revolutionary change.

I just watched the first movie, but I wouldnt say its pro austrian economics, as they clearly point out that the FED is indeed privately owned.

[Das war einmal]

No, most people haven't heard of this movie. People see us fighting for them on many occasions.


Did you allready get a response from the zeitgeist movement?

I did enjoy the first part of the first movie. The rest of the movie, I heard before

[Kassad]

I just watched the first movie, but I wouldnt say its pro austrian economics, as they clearly point out that the FED is indeed privately owned.

The Austrian and laissez-faire types are very opposed to the current banking system. Basically, the only regulation they advocate is that of the banks, but they ignore that it's their deregulatory schemes that allowed the private banking system to gain control of the monetary system.

[VioletRing]

Hello, I am a member of the Zeitgeist Movement, my husband found this link through the Zeitgeist threads. We have not been apart of it for very long, but so far we both seem to agree with the main ideas.

I see the movement as an evolving way of fixing problems. While it is similar to Communism in the principals, it's not the same. I live in the US, and all I really know about Communism is what they told me in school, and what I've seen on the History Channel. This is where most Americans are, we only know the historically applied form of Communism. Therefor, any ideas of Communism being good are dismissed and feared. The Zeitgeist Movement really could be the best thing for the US. It is a way of presenting similar ideas with newer techniques, to prevent faults of the past.

Going through the forums, I do agree that a fair amount of members might likely be extremely malleable, and that does scare me. I have seen several posts from people wanting for something to happen, suggesting ridiculous, and possibly very negative actions. There is, however, a large number of intelligent people involved, who are also very cautious about what is going on within the movement.

There is a part of the transition plan called the New Zealand Project. We are working on building a city in New Zealand, that will be self-sustained. It would operate similar to a commune, and it would be the test city. It is not that ZM just expects the monetary system to collapse and a resorce based economy to just pop up out of no where. We do relize that you have to work for that, so the plans of action are this: The New Zealand Project - have an operational city, that runs well, to be the insperation for more cities; inform people of government problems - tell people about the movies, literature, anything that will get people ingaged; live how you want the world to live - change your lifestyle, live greener...

The ideal idea is that many citys/groups will start to emerg similar to ZM. So, if Communism works best for Europe then do that, and once people have changed to see a new light (sorry it sounds cheesey I couldn't think of better wording) the different groups can colaborate, work with each other, seeing humanity as a whole instead of fighting to survive or excell.

I have not done any research into Communism, partly because of the stigma in the US, but after finding this board I think I will.

[Coggeh]

Hello, I am a member of the Zeitgeist Movement, my husband found this link through the Zeitgeist threads. We have not been apart of it for very long, but so far we both seem to agree with the main ideas.

I see the movement as an evolving way of fixing problems. While it is similar to Communism in the principals, it's not the same. I live in the US, and all I really know about Communism is what they told me in school, and what I've seen on the History Channel. This is where most Americans are, we only know the historically applied form of Communism. Therefor, any ideas of Communism being good are dismissed and feared. The Zeitgeist Movement really could be the best thing for the US. It is a way of presenting similar ideas with newer techniques, to prevent faults of the past.

Going through the forums, I do agree that a fair amount of members might likely be extremely malleable, and that does scare me. I have seen several posts from people wanting for something to happen, suggesting ridiculous, and possibly very negative actions. There is, however, a large number of intelligent people involved, who are also very cautious about what is going on within the movement.

There is a part of the transition plan called the New Zealand Project. We are working on building a city in New Zealand, that will be self-sustained. It would operate similar to a commune, and it would be the test city. It is not that ZM just expects the monetary system to collapse and a resorce based economy to just pop up out of no where. We do relize that you have to work for that, so the plans of action are this: The New Zealand Project - have an operational city, that runs well, to be the insperation for more cities; inform people of government problems - tell people about the movies, literature, anything that will get people ingaged; live how you want the world to live - change your lifestyle, live greener...

The ideal idea is that many citys/groups will start to emerg similar to ZM. So, if Communism works best for Europe then do that, and once people have changed to see a new light (sorry it sounds cheesey I couldn't think of better wording) the different groups can colaborate, work with each other, seeing humanity as a whole instead of fighting to survive or excell.

I have not done any research into Communism, partly because of the stigma in the US, but after finding this board I think I will.
But your movement is relatively the same thing . And tell someone to change the part that shows socialism and communism grouped together with fascism and capitalism . Its fairly ignorant ... to say the least .:mellow:

And also , welcome to the board :)

[Yazman]

I agree with serpent in that they are one of the best things the US could get given current material conditions.. and one thing I do like is that they advocate the total abolition of the currency system which is something, as a marxist technocrat, I do certainly agree with!

[VioletRing]

But your movement is relatively the same thing . And tell someone to change the part that shows socialism and communism grouped together with fascism and capitalism . Its fairly ignorant ... to say the least .:mellow:we are talking about their historically applied form, not the idealized forms which advocate no money. (quote from the activists manual that was just released. p5 footnotes.) i can't post links yet but it's on the top left on the website once you click english thezeitgeistmovement.com

when i talk to someone about a Resource Based Economy they often say that it sounds like communism(in a rather negative way), and i tell them that is is very similar to the ideals of communism. and i admit i don't know the differences. the amount of negativity surrounding the word communism i think turns a lot of people off to the idea.

as far as a "transition plan" there is alot of talk revolving around it. we are creating the RBE Foundation that will serve as our central "company" this will be the core of the movement. this company will help distrubute resources throughout the movement. in the beginning will be the creation of basicly communes. there are plans underway to start the first one in new zealand. this will be a farm. the idea is to be totally self sufficiant. possibly generating enough power to sell some back to the grid in the area. also distributing food to future projects and selling some to earn money.

the general idea is to help spread the ideas and inform everyone of the corrupion of the government. and how the private international banks are seriously behind everything. i'm not talking about illuminati or NWO or any of that crazy shit, i try to only look at, and discuss with others, credible information. talking about secret societies only reduces your message. but there is alot of information about how the banks are behind most wars. there is a move "The Money Masters" that gives a very good history of money, very interesting. but i digress... the more people know about how corrupt the system really is, the harder it's going to be for them (big brother, government take your pic) to convince us into a new system once this current system with the federal reserve, and the world banks. collapses.

one of the things i like the most about this movement is that it is being created by its members. if you are interested in the idea of a RBE join the forums, look around in the community area. maby you could imput some ideas. its not about simply following other peoples ideas. create your own.

there is a very global feel in the movement, and thats why i feel it will work.

by the way i'm the husband. zach

[Yazman]

one of the things i like the most about this movement is that it is being created by its members

Yes, this is an EXCELLENT thing, it is especially good because this means it is not dominated by elitist vanguards ;)

[Raúl Duke]

we are talking about their historically applied form, not the idealized forms which advocate no money. (quote from the activists manual that was just released. p5 footnotes.) i can't post links yet but it's on the top left on the website once you click english thezeitgeistmovement.com

when i talk to someone about a Resource Based Economy they often say that it sounds like communism(in a rather negative way), and i tell them that is is very similar to the ideals of communism. and i admit i don't know the differences. the amount of negativity surrounding the word communism i think turns a lot of people off to the idea.

as far as a "transition plan" there is alot of talk revolving around it. we are creating the RBE Foundation that will serve as our central "company" this will be the core of the movement. this company will help distrubute resources throughout the movement. in the beginning will be the creation of basicly communes. there are plans underway to start the first one in new zealand. this will be a farm. the idea is to be totally self sufficiant. possibly generating enough power to sell some back to the grid in the area. also distributing food to future projects and selling some to earn money.

the general idea is to help spread the ideas and inform everyone of the corrupion of the government. and how the private international banks are seriously behind everything. i'm not talking about illuminati or NWO or any of that crazy shit, i try to only look at, and discuss with others, credible information. talking about secret societies only reduces your message. but there is alot of information about how the banks are behind most wars. there is a move "The Money Masters" that gives a very good history of money, very interesting. but i digress... the more people know about how corrupt the system really is, the harder it's going to be for them (big brother, government take your pic) to convince us into a new system once this current system with the federal reserve, and the world banks. collapses.

one of the things i like the most about this movement is that it is being created by its members. if you are interested in the idea of a RBE join the forums, look around in the community area. maby you could imput some ideas. its not about simply following other peoples ideas. create your own.

there is a very global feel in the movement, and thats why i feel it will work.

by the way i'm the husband. zach

Your movement sounds similar to the Technocracy movement of 1930s U.S.
They also I think made a company with the aim of...well I don't know exactly (ask a technocrat) and explicitly advocated a "resource-based economy." Although I wonder if it will surpass that previous movement or if it will it end up, in the words of Marx, a farce. Although, I wonder, besides making communes and convincing people, how do you plan to make these ideas adopted/practiced in a wide-area like say a country?

[Yazman]

Your movement sounds similar to the Technocracy movement of 1930s U.S.
They also I think made a company with the aim of...well I don't know exactly (ask a technocrat) and explicitly advocated a "resource-based economy." Although I wonder if it will surpass that previous movement or if it will it end up, in the words of Marx, a farce. Although, I wonder, besides making communes and convincing people, how do you plan to make these ideas adopted/practiced in a wide-area like say a country?

You are referring to Technocracy Inc. which isn't really a business.. and it never really ended. It declined in popularity a bit but the technocracy movement has been gaining a lot of ground in recent years. You should also know that the various streams of technocratic thought are generally internationalist - I haven't encountered any who weren't.

[Dimentio]

Your movement sounds similar to the Technocracy movement of 1930s U.S.
They also I think made a company with the aim of...well I don't know exactly (ask a technocrat) and explicitly advocated a "resource-based economy." Although I wonder if it will surpass that previous movement or if it will it end up, in the words of Marx, a farce. Although, I wonder, besides making communes and convincing people, how do you plan to make these ideas adopted/practiced in a wide-area like say a country?

The problem of the contemporary technocratic movement, which I think everyone has observed, is that people are not generally united for something, but rather against something. For example, during a revolution, they are generally united more against the status quo than against something new.

Therefore, it is important that there is some general conception of what a post-capitalist society would look like. Otherwise, we would most likely end up in square one anyway.

[dudeitseddy]

Zeitgeist is what introduced me into seeing what capitalism is and what it does to us. The first movie is a little ridiculous when it comes to the whole microchipping and alex jones stuff. However, I think Zeitgeist Addendum is a really good movie. It is wrong how they completely bashed on communism and said its a bad system. But most people are afraid of the word communism and if they disguise it with "The Venus Project" more people will be attracted to it. The Venus Project seems to me like the final phase of communism with a nicer name. Its not a bad move for Peter Joseph to pull of since people think of communism as what north korea and the soviet union has.

[Yazman]

Its not a bad move for Peter Joseph to pull of since people think of communism as what north korea and the soviet union has.

Communism needs to be divorced from Leninism in order to move forward. Technocratic movements like the Venus Project provide a good framework for a communist society that is achievable with existing technology. That most people are disillusioned with "communism" is more a mixture of terms; they are really disillusioned with "marxism-leninism."

[Yazman]

Its not a bad move for Peter Joseph to pull of since people think of communism as what north korea and the soviet union has.

Communism needs to be divorced from Leninism in order to move forward. Technocratic movements like the Venus Project provide a good framework for a communist society that is achievable with existing technology. That most people are disillusioned with "communism" is more a mixture of terms; they are really disillusioned with "marxism-leninism."

[DeLeonist]

I agree with Serpent re:


I think at the current material circumstances, the ZG movement is probably the best thing that the USA could get. Its some sort of post-leftist leftist movement which has rejuvenerated the end goals of socialism.

According to this website hit calculator (websiteoutlook.com - I'm unable to post the full link), the Zeitgeist Movement website gets 36,000 hits a day!

The revolutionary left should i think be making the most of this movement, critiquing the reactionary and nutty aspects and building on the progressive elements.

Anyone interested in starting a Zeitgeist/ technocracy group on Revleft?

[DeLeonist]

Re starting a new group, I see now that this is probably not necessary, as I just found the "Human Progress" group, which is already addressing some technocracy/ Zeitgeist type issues.

[Dimentio]

Communism needs to be divorced from Leninism in order to move forward. Technocratic movements like the Venus Project provide a good framework for a communist society that is achievable with existing technology. That most people are disillusioned with "communism" is more a mixture of terms; they are really disillusioned with "marxism-leninism."

Yes I agree.

[Mowgli]

The revolutionary left should i think be making the most of this movement, critiquing the reactionary and nutty aspects and building on the progressive elements.

Fully agree. Unity is strength.

[RedHal]

I'm impressed how they are using internet and savvy video production to get the message out there. The first movie seemed like a Ron Paul Libertarian 911 conspiracy film, Addendum was much better. The latest film "Movement Orientation Presentation" is their best yet, it gets into the destructive nature of capitalism and pretty much presents the ideal communist society all of us leftwing -ist (minus primitivist) dream about. It's a post scarcity society free of exploitation and oppression.
I don't see any reason anarchists/communists should be opposed to this movement. However the major difference between anarchist/communist movements and the zeitgheist movment is that we are dealing with the present and near future, while they are talking about the far future(hopefully).

[Kassad]

I'm impressed how they are using internet and savvy video production to get the message out there. The first movie seemed like a Ron Paul Libertarian 911 conspiracy film, Addendum was much better. The latest film "Movement Orientation Presentation" is their best yet, it gets into the destructive nature of capitalism and pretty much presents the ideal communist society all of us leftwing -ist (minus primitivist) dream about. It's a post scarcity society free of exploitation and oppression.
I don't see any reason anarchists/communists should be opposed to this movement. However the major difference between anarchist/communist movements and the zeitgheist movment is that we are dealing with the present and near future, while they are talking about the far future(hopefully).

But does even one of their articles, lectures, movies or anything of the sort address class struggle? Does it call for total workers ownership of the means of production? No. Zeitgeist Addendum calls for the elimination of scarcity by harnessing and distributing abundance, which I understand, but there's a huge gap. It's like the episode of South Park where the gnomes steal your underpants. Their plan was like this:

Step 1: Steal underpants.
Step 2: ???
Step 3: PROFIT!

That's exactly what The Zeitgeist Movement is doing. Step 1 is being stuck in the capitalist exploiter society and step 3 is the ultimate liberation of the people, but step 2 is totally unknown. You can't have revolutionary struggle without revolutionary means. The Zeitgeist Movement has surrealist and utopian goals with no means of obtaining them. They are opposed to violent revolution, which means they are mostly just calling for reformism, which is bourgeois. They have absolutely no means of struggle or liberation and that's why they will get absolutely nowhere while Marxist-Leninist parties continue to actually struggle.

[Rusty Shackleford]

well, i watched both Zeitgeist and Zeitgeist Addendum, and for a few days i was all over it, but i realized ti did sound a lot like communism. so, i rejected the idea of joining that movement. instead, i am just studying theories as of now. and this site is a much healthier place to start. Zeitgeist did get me into this though. so i will thank it for that

[Cynical Observer]

The Zeitgeist films actually contributed to my political positions alot when i first started getting into political theory, it's presented for the beginner who hasn't done much research and is a useful for getting people pissed about the status quo, and helps to steer them in the right direction (addendum more so than the original, but the original has some good points as well. I haven't seen the 3rd yet.) but, as others have already mentioned, it does seem to have a really passive approach to achieving their goals. I suggest we try reach out to them and instill alittle class consciousness in them.

I'm going to go to their boards and talk with them. More of us should do this, maybe we'll influence some of them.

[RedHal]

But does even one of their articles, lectures, movies or anything of the sort address class struggle? Does it call for total workers ownership of the means of production? No. Zeitgeist Addendum calls for the elimination of scarcity by harnessing and distributing abundance, which I understand, but there's a huge gap. It's like the episode of South Park where the gnomes steal your underpants. Their plan was like this:

Step 1: Steal underpants.
Step 2: ???
Step 3: PROFIT!

That's exactly what The Zeitgeist Movement is doing. Step 1 is being stuck in the capitalist exploiter society and step 3 is the ultimate liberation of the people, but step 2 is totally unknown. You can't have revolutionary struggle without revolutionary means. The Zeitgeist Movement has surrealist and utopian goals with no means of obtaining them. They are opposed to violent revolution, which means they are mostly just calling for reformism, which is bourgeois. They have absolutely no means of struggle or liberation and that's why they will get absolutely nowhere while Marxist-Leninist parties continue to actually struggle.

yeah that was my major issue with the zeitgeist movement, I tried not to use the word utopian, but I think that's what it is. But like others have said, it's the best for the US right now, I've skimmed through their forum, and a lot of the members have just started realizing that what they've been told at school and tv might not be the truth afterall. I think it's good that this movement reaches people who normally would be revolted by any communist party.

[DIzzIE]

Going to an old copy of the Zeitgeist website (http://web.archive.org/web/20080104033502/zeitgeistmovie.com/activism.htm) tells me everything I need to know about this garbage 'movement':



Support Ron Paul For President 2008

Congressman Dr. Ron Paul is by far the most outstanding candidate in the 2008 elections. He is the only candidate that is not owned by the corporations. He isn't perfect, but Dr. Paul, and his constitutional disposition, stands alone when it comes to intergrity and a true understanding about where we are headed.

Not only is he completely aware of and OPPOSED TO THE NORTH AMERICAN UNION, he wants to END THE INCOME TAX AND ABOLISH THE IRS.( ! ) He actually proposed legislation to ABOLISH THE FEDERAL RESERVE ! - Not to mention he would end the Iraq war, which has caused the deaths of well over 655,000 civilians, conservatively.

The points addressed in the above paragraph are of paramount importance in a very immediate sense. Dr. Paul truly understands these issues and is the first candidate in roughly 50 years who has had the courage to stand up against the banking, corporate fascist elite which are carving the world up for themselves.

For those who think it is impossible for Ron Paul to win the election, I would like to point out that even though the silence regarding Dr. Paul is deafening from the mainstream media, Dr. Paul has won nearly all Debate Polls and Straw Polls, including the most recent in Maryland.

He has also broken the record for most money raised in one day on Dec. 16th! The support for Ron Paul is growing everyday. The next step is eradicate the compromised electronic voting machines that NO paper trail and can be hacked at will. Watch This

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/

[Dimentio]

Going to an old copy of the Zeitgeist website (http://web.archive.org/web/20080104033502/zeitgeistmovie.com/activism.htm) tells me everything I need to know about this garbage 'movement':

That was then. Now they are supporting The Venus Project. It is strange, I know. But all attention is good attention.

[DIzzIE]

That was then. Now they are supporting The Venus Project. It is strange, I know. But all attention is good attention.

Yes, that 'then' being the time leading up to the US election of 2008. Obviously now that the election is over it would no longer make sense to have a 'Ron Paul for president' page, but have they actually stated in one of their 'radio announcements' or anywhere else that they no longer support the ideas espoused in the early versions of the website/film?

Or, if in the span of less than two years, they are now no longer devout libertarian conspiracy wingnuts but are instead devout futurist utopians, then perhaps instead of a thread discussing our opinions of the (apparently ever-shifting) 'movement' we should start a betting pool on what the "Zeitgeist Movement" will mean by 2012 :lol:?

[Dimentio]

Yes, that 'then' being the time leading up to the US election of 2008. Obviously now that the election is over it would no longer make sense to have a 'Ron Paul for president' page, but have they actually stated in one of their 'radio announcements' or anywhere else that they no longer support the ideas espoused in the early versions of the website/film?

Or, if in the span of less than two years, they are now no longer devout libertarian conspiracy wingnuts but are instead devout futurist utopians, then perhaps instead of a thread discussing our opinions of the (apparently ever-shifting) 'movement' we should start a betting pool on what the "Zeitgeist Movement" will mean by 2012 :lol:?

I personally think its a high probability that it would'nt exist by 2012. It is composed of conspiracy nuts + radical progressives + some libertarians. If it stands together, then I promise I would eat my underpants.

[Cynical Observer]

Yes, that 'then' being the time leading up to the US election of 2008. Obviously now that the election is over it would no longer make sense to have a 'Ron Paul for president' page, but have they actually stated in one of their 'radio announcements' or anywhere else that they no longer support the ideas espoused in the early versions of the website/film?

Or, if in the span of less than two years, they are now no longer devout libertarian conspiracy wingnuts but are instead devout futurist utopians, then perhaps instead of a thread discussing our opinions of the (apparently ever-shifting) 'movement' we should start a betting pool on what the "Zeitgeist Movement" will mean by 2012 :lol:?
they'll all be anarcho-primmies by then

[Dimentio]

they'll all be anarcho-primmies by then

There is'nt one Zeitgeist movement. There are literally hundreds of Zeitgeist movements. Most of them have 1 member, but some actually have quite a few members. Then we have the vast, unorganised mass who simply think the movies are "cool". But a respectable segment is organising itself. What they are organising themselves for is discutable, but the Zeitgeist movement should have creds for having activated a large segment of the organisation.

I mean, most radical leftist organisations in America are university-based and composed of academicians who are using an own language to which many Americans cannot identify themselves with. I think the Zeitgeist movement simply has taken (sometimes vulgar) progressive criticism of the system and made it attractive.

[NecroCommie]

I dont understand why the zeitgeistists dont just accept class struggle and turn communist? :confused:

[Dimentio]

I dont understand why the zeitgeistists dont just accept class struggle and turn communist? :confused:

People are attracted by different kinds of language. You must speak to everyone in their language if you should have some sort of success.

And communism has a sorta bad reputation.

[POUM]

I think that the Zetigeist movement is the best thing that happened on the left in the last few years.
They are basically presenting the more or less samo system of ideas just without the burden the historic burden word "communism" carries with itself. Or the misintepretations of "anarchism".
The ZM favors a stateless classless society which is based on techonological progress. Sounds familiar? The only thing by which it actually differs from anar. and comm. is the way it wants it to be done. They do not neceserally want a revolution but will try peacfully. But unlike reformists they are not a hierarchical organisation thus there is no danger of tranfsormation into what most social-democrat parties are today.
I wouldn't say they are anti-revolutionary, they just want to try something else first. The movement has momentum, it has an elaborate propaganda frame. Finally a competent leftist movement in gaining massive support :D

[Dimentio]

I think that the Zetigeist movement is the best thing that happened on the left in the last few years.
They are basically presenting the more or less samo system of ideas just without the burden the historic burden word "communism" carries with itself. Or the misintepretations of "anarchism".
The ZM favors a stateless classless society which is based on techonological progress. Sounds familiar? The only thing by which it actually differs from anar. and comm. is the way it wants it to be done. They do not neceserally want a revolution but will try peacfully. But unlike reformists they are not a hierarchical organisation thus there is no danger of tranfsormation into what most social-democrat parties are today.
I wouldn't say they are anti-revolutionary, they just want to try something else first. The movement has momentum, it has an elaborate propaganda frame. Finally a competent leftist movement in gaining massive support :D

I think they will have developed into something else within three years. I don't think they are a movement, but a soil for future movements.

[Atlanta]

Personally the Z move smelled of Facism to me.....

[Dimentio]

Personally the Z move smelled of Facism to me.....

Seen Addendum?

[POUM]

Well i agree,it will evolve,but my point is i dont think it will degenerate like european reformist movements since it is opposed to hierarchy

[sanpal]

The elite power systems are little affected in the long run by traditional protest and political movements. We must move beyond these 'establishment rebellions' and work with a tool much more powerful:
We will stop supporting the system, while constantly advocating knowledge, peace, unity and compassion. We cannot "fight the system". Hate, anger and the 'war' mentality are failed means for change, for they perpetuate the same tools the corrupt, established power systems use to maintain control to begin with.

We will stop supporting the system, ...

How? What they mean by it?


The elite power systems are little affected in the long run by traditional protest and political movements. We must move beyond these 'establishment rebellions' ...and then:


Therefore, they perpetuate the doctrine of the institution, simply to maintain their personal integrity, as they see it.
We must break this cycle, for it paralyses our growth not only as individuals, but as a society.
How they intend "to break" this cycle? By collective meditation?


All thoughts written in text is pretty but not scientifically.

[Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor]

The movement has no credibility. You can't escape the connotations of the word communism by changing the name. If the movement ever became significant, opponents would simply point out the parallels between communism and the Zeitgeist movement.

Fudgeman is known for being the Nazi leader during WW2.
Fudgeman was responsible for the death of many Jews.
Doesn't that make Fudgeman Hitler?
So it does.

If you can convince someone that communism is desirable with a name other than communism, you could convince them of communism. It's simply they're too cowardly to call themselves a communist.

There is nothing in a "name." Communism isn't disliked because of propaganda related to the name. It is disliked because of propaganda related to the ideas. The language still represents the same fundamental notion regardless of what you call it.

And the Zeitgeist movement is essentially just saying scientific advancement will make the world perfect. If a capitalist could be happy and successful without exploiting others, he will do so. Technology will allow us to give a better quality of life to others without sacrificing ourselves.

True? Yes. Will this eliminate class structure? No. Being a ruler, being seen as better, is an end in itself. Power is something some if not all people desire. If there was unlimited food in the world, people would still let others starve. In fact, there is plenty (not unlimited food) of food now. Yet people still starve.

It has nothing to do with limitations on resources and everything to do with the human condition and the inability to resolve conflicts properly without creating conditions of equality. One can't expect a fair deal to be reached when one party stands twelve feet higher with the key to the bank.

These guys are also associated with the 9/11 conspiracy movement, if I remember correctly. That makes them a bunch of nuts in my book.

[CommunityBeliever]

I just wish these people would become communists I mean their utopian future is a communist one and that is what Marx proposed.

My greatest worry about these people is that if they do not come to our communist movement that they will do nothing to change the world. They are getting good ideas out there but not telling people how to get to them.

At least we can admit that it is good that they are convincing some people not to look for capitalism for answers. Hopefully they will go about doing good things within the confines of bourgeoisie society like make more people put solar panels on their homes because when the revolution goes down electricity might be scarce like in the Cuban special period.

[hammer and sickle]

"Q:How does The Venus Project compare with Communism?

A:Communism used money and labor, had social stratification, and elected officials to maintain the communists' traditions. Most importantly, Communism did not eliminate SCARCITY nor did they have a blueprint or the methods for the production of abundance. Machine production rather than labor will dominate the future. Perhaps through no fault of their own, they also had to maintain huge military expenditures to protect themselves from invasion of fascistic and capitalistic institutions.

Communism being similar to a resource-based economy or The Venus Project is an erroneous concept. Communism has money, banks, armies, police, prisons, charismatic personalities, social stratification, and is managed by appointed leaders. The Venus Project's aim is to surpass the need for the use of money. Police, prisons and the military would no longer be necessary when goods, services, healthcare, and education are available to all people. The Venus Project would replace politicians with a cybernated society in which all of the physical entities are managed and operated by computerized systems. The only region that the computers do not operate or manage is the surveillance of human beings. This would be completely unnecessary and considered socially offensive. A society that uses technology without human concern has no basis of survival. Communism has no blueprint or methodology to carry out their ideals and along with capitalism, fascism, and socialism, will ultimately go down in history as failed social experiments. "

Ha, I like how Communism is all in past tense as if it doesnt exist anymore.

[Pol Pot]

its pretty close to communism in some ideas. Although I would gladly participate in that movement if it shows to have "balls" to challenge "the man" ;)

[9]

I am extremely uneasy about the conspiracy-driven ideology of this/these movement(s). Irrational conspiracy theories beget more irrational conspiracy theories. It is a pretty big jump in logic to assume that these people are just going to 'make the swap' from crackpot conspiracies to some form of scientific socialism.

[Bankotsu]

zeitgeist-movement

Biggest piece of internet spawned horseshit I have ever seen.

The entire thing is based on rubbish information.

Loads of internet junk these days.

Illuminati one world government anyone? :lol:

[SubcomandanteJames]

I think the Zeitgeist movement, if nothing else, will teach people to think outside the nice little packaged box they were born in, and maybe that will lead them to the revolutionary politics.

[9]

I think the Zeitgeist movement, if nothing else, will teach people to think outside the nice little packaged box they were born in, and maybe that will lead them to the revolutionary politics.

I don't know that it teaches most people anything, really.... it seems, instead, to offer an alternative nice little packaged box for people to think inside of. Granted its not the box they were conditioned to accept from childhood, but it is essentially just as full of bullshit. I know there are exceptions to this - people who have said they started out with Zeitgeist and moved onto revolutionary leftist politics, but I would expect such cases to be very limited since, it seems, the 'movement' employs conspiratorial, magical modes of thinking which reduce the atrocities of capitalism to some tiny omnipotent cabal of crazies.
I'm also curious about the proportion of Zeitgeist members who believe "teh j00z" were behind 9/11. A growing segment of self-identified 'progressives' seem to subscribe to this nonsense, and I would think (I admit I don't know this) that Zeitgeist would be a breeding ground for this mentality. In which case it seems more likely they'd be inclined toward something like Nazism rather than communism.
Perhaps I am being too dismissive and I should do more research into it, but this is certainly the feeling I have about the Zeitgeist 'movement' so far. I would be more than happy to be proven wrong on this, though; it is just the conspiracy aspect that really makes me think that these people will not make for good allies.

[POUM]

If the ZM is full of conspiracy then so is the revleft movement aswell, in my language there is an old saying "The owl mocks the sparrow for its big eyes".
The Fed. reserve and monetary system aspect of Zeitgeist is explained brillantly,and there is no indication that the movie implies jews are behind Sept. 11.

you should definetely look into it more, there is no place for sectarianism on the left.

[Bankotsu]

it seems, the 'movement' employs conspiratorial, magical modes of thinking which reduce the atrocities of capitalism to some tiny omnipotent cabal of crazies.


Agreed.

It just the same bunch of endless nonsense filth along with the likes of David icke, Alex Jones, Jeff Rense, La Rouche, Birchers and the rest of the conspiracy loons you find online.

[Dimentio]

If the ZM is full of conspiracy then so is the revleft movement aswell, in my language there is an old saying "The owl mocks the sparrow for its big eyes".
The Fed. reserve and monetary system aspect of Zeitgeist is explained brillantly,and there is no indication that the movie implies jews are behind Sept. 11.

you should definetely look into it more, there is no place for sectarianism on the left.

The banking system is explained without any antisemitic references. There is no antisemitism in the Zeitgeist movies. Very good entry btw.

[Bankotsu]

Some critical reviews of Zeitgeist:

http://www.cynicsunlimited.com/2008/10/12/movie-review-zeitgeist-addendum/

http://boingboing.net/2007/08/06/jay-kinney-reviews-z.html




Originally Posted by POUMhttp://www.revleft.com/vb/../revleft/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.revleft.com/vb/../showthread.php?p=1531798#post1531798)
If the ZM is full of conspiracy then so is the revleft movement aswellLike what?

Saw the first Zeitgeist film and hated the agitprop style of the presentation. Just like the rest of the conspiracy loony films, Alex Jones etc.

So they are basically rehashing old communist criticism of monopoly capitalism, financial and corporate oligarchy cliques etc, but in a more irrational and conspiratorial fashion.


A less agitprop and more rational analysis of the banking system, as compared to Zeitgeist's agitprop style:



Banks are different because they are able to create new money in their credit operations. We can see this when we realise that at any one time, the banks as a whole could be giving overdrafts to everybody in the entire economy.

Thus, far more money is circulating in the economy than the money derived from savings generated by past value creation. Part of the money is actually what we can call fictitious money -- money derived not from the past but from expectations that it will be validated by future productive activity. Within capitalism, banks also do not have to be operated as private capitalist companies.

At the beginning of the 1990s, for example, more than half of the 100 biggest banks in Europe were publicly owned and their financial criteria for operating were, in principle, matters of public choice. And even if they are private, the banks play such an essential and powerful role in the public economy because of their capacity to issue credit money that any sensible capitalist class will ensure that the state is constantly interfering in their operations (even though, for ideological reasons, one wants to keep these state functions 'low profile'). As Kapstein puts it: "Banks are told how much capital they must hold, where they can operate, what products they can sell, and how much they can lend to any one firm."

The existence of this fictitious credit money is very beneficial for the whole economy because of its role in facilitating the circulation of commodities. Without it, economic development would be far slower. It is especially important to employers, enabling them to raise large amounts of money for equipment which will yield up its full value in production only over many future years.

If employers could invest only real savings -- the money derived from past value-creation -- investing in fixed capital would be far more costly --too costly for a lot of investment. And credit has also become a very important means of expanding the sales of goods to consumers.

This is another way of saying that modern economies run on large amounts of debt. So the banks do play an important role in both channelling savings and creating new funds (fictitious money) for productive investment. An entire capitalist economy could be run with a financial system consisting entirely of such banks.

http://www.marxsite.com/Global%20Gamble2.htm

[9]

If the ZM is full of conspiracy then so is the revleft movement aswell, in my language there is an old saying "The owl mocks the sparrow for its big eyes".

That sounds lovely. The problem, however, is that it means absolutely nothing. What is the "revleft movement"? To my knowledge, no such movement exists. Are you referring to all revolutionary leftist movements or specifically to the website revleft.com, which is not a "movement" by even the most preposterously lax standards. Either way, your statement is demonstrative of the kind of immaterial postmodernist arguments which serve only to obfuscate clear distinctions and sound rationality, replacing them instead with the sort of slobbering subjectivity that belongs in the realm of mystics and theologians.


The Fed. reserve and monetary system aspect of Zeitgeist is explained brillantly,and there is no indication that the movie implies jews are behind Sept. 11.It is not really necessary to say "THE J00Z ARE BEHIND IT!" to follow the line of reasoning to its logical conclusion. And these are the sorts of conclusions that are reached by conspiratorial "logic". Anyone who understands the nature of anti-Semitism and the manner in which it manifests itself ought to be exceptionally cautious about any sort of conspiratorial "theories" regarding world-domination. Conclusions which implicate, not the capitalist class, but minority ethnic and religious populations as well as nonexistent magical omnipotent cults (see "Illuminati") in the crimes which materialists and rational leftist ascribe to the bourgeoisie ought to be cause for serious concern. This sort of mentality is immensely dangerous, and the sheer scale of unfettered opportunism that would have to be involved for principled revolutionary leftists to embrace the mystical religion of conspiratology would be absolutely atrocious.


you should definetely look into it more, there is no place for sectarianism on the left.I am doggedly opposed to trivial sectarianism within the revolutionary left, but the term "revolutionary left" assumes that the basic principles of class struggle, some degree of materialist analysis, the goal of overthrowing the capitalist class, workers control, etc. are shared in common. That does not mean I am opposed to respectful criticism or in depth debate about the legitimacy of a particular approach. It is also important to point out that this general spirit of cooperation does not extend to conspiracy theorists and third-positionists which, as far as I can tell, are appropriate descriptions of the Zeitgeist Movement.

[Dimentio]

So, by claiming that banks are at the centre of the capitalist system, and that no capitalist system would be possible without fractional reserve-banking, the one claiming so is thereby per definition an antisemite?

Please, look into this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HVrHtbSo11I

And, remember.

Marx called antisemitism "the communism of the imbeciles".

Zeitgeist has as much in common with "JEWS DID 9/11" as Das Kapital has to do with Mein Kampf.

[Led Zeppelin]

Marx called antisemitism "the communism of the imbeciles".

Where did he say this?

[Dimentio]

Where did he say this?

In a letter. Marx denounced antisemitism in "On the Jewish Question" (is it so the book's called).

The point is that the theory of "ZOG" is practically a very primitive anti-capitalist idea where Jews are pointed out as the instigators of capitalism based on flawed reasoning. Antisemites of the modern variety are also often against all progressive changes since 1789.

[Raúl Duke]

Why is it being referred to as a movement?
If they're a movement as claimed they seem to have very little public profile, for an alleged burgeoning movement...

[POUM]

I meant the revolutionary left movements -anarchism and communism, ok genius?


I don't see how anyone could connect 9/11 with Jews just by watching Zeitgeist, in fact this is the first time i heard such a theory,even said in ridicule. The word "Jew" isn't even mentioned in the movie. If you are arguing someone with a conspiratorial frame of mind could connect this then so could someone connect The Capital saying "the jews made capitalism",so we should basically blame Marx for all of today's antisemite/anticapitalist sentiments.


The left can also sound very conspiratory to non-leftists. The capitalists trying to rule the world and all that ;)

[Raúl Duke]

I meant the revolutionary left movements -anarchism and communism, ok genius?You talking to me?

I wasn't referring solely to you...
I was just asking why, to the general audience, should we call it a movement...
I mean this "movement" seems to compose a few people who say "yea I saw Zeitgeist addendum; it's ideas are cool" and then go about doing nothing, liberal activism kind of stuff (like writing letters for Amnesty), or supporting Ron Paul. Besides that part, the other part of this "movement" (which is more like a movement) are those conspiracy theorists types who may or may not back Alex Jones (although most probably don't) and sometimes show up to protests denouncing everyone as part of a conspiracy.

This "movement" just has little real life, less then even the radical left, presence in my opinion (although I'm open to being proven otherwise).

[POUM]

Sorry,i was refering to Apikoros, forgot to quote..

[Dimentio]

You talking to me?

I wasn't referring solely to you...
I was just asking why, to the general audience, should we call it a movement...
I mean this "movement" seems to compose a few people who say "yea I saw Zeitgeist addendum; it's ideas are cool" and then go about doing nothing, liberal activism kind of stuff (like writing letters for Amnesty), or supporting Ron Paul. Besides that part, the other part of this "movement" (which is more like a movement) are those conspiracy theorists types who may or may not back Alex Jones (although most probably don't) and sometimes show up to protests denouncing everyone as part of a conspiracy.

This "movement" just has little real life, less then even the radical left, presence in my opinion (although I'm open to being proven otherwise).

The Zeitgeist movement, I must say in all honesty, is more like a breeding ground for a broad variety of social movements than a uniform movement with one goal. I would say that it in its structure reminds a bit of the Pre-Nicaean christian movements or the Fasci movements in Italy during the 1910's (before fascism was formed of that). I am happy that the Zeitgeist movement has an evidently progressive leadership.