The Zeitgeist Movies, Movement and the Venus Project

positive aspects of the zeitgeist films include:
religion and its origin, the federal reserve and its affect on the world/how money is created based on inflation, the economic hitman speaking about US terrorist activities throughout the 80's, they showed how war generates profits for the ruling class, they spoke about how politicians cannot solve our problems for us, and as far as the venus project goes...i do not feel technology is evil nor do i feel it is some kind of god to be worshiped in futuristic societies. i do not think they have everything figured out but i think they have some good ideas: solve some of the worlds problems by substituting laws with non profit generating technologies and cooperation between all people. that is what i took from the films. but maybe i was just hearing what i wanted to hear. so perhaps i and others who see what i see are totally wrong. whether or not this is the case, anyone who talks shit instead of being friendly and suggesting better ideas is contributing to a wider divide between people who should be allies. not very productive.

 

its seems like Shitgeist was riding the coat-tails of Loose Change and all the other thousands of youtube-famous conspiracy videos. almost every conspiracy theorist is out to line their pockets dis-informing the public, and spreading propaganda. as for pan-dimensional reptilian-humanoid beings, someone took too many hits of acid...

 

couldn't have said it better....

 

As far as I can tell, the venus project seems to be some sort of post scarcity communism, but without consideration of centuries of struggle.

It's like they are saying "hey, here is a cool idea for a future society!" Yes, anarchists thought of that a hundred years ago. Now how are we going to get there? Is it going to take you another hundred years to think up syndicalism?

The film has little relevance. We already know shit is fucked up, on so many levels. Work building an anti-war movement around direct action. Work on building the IWW. Etc, etc, etc.

Just my two cents

 

Could anyone recommend me some books / articles for reading about Venus ( I'm interested in understanding the movement before saying it's just a facking fail ). I was told some basics of it, I tried to find some FAQs or something, or any anti.venus projects - but had no luck.

Thanks

 

anti-semitism is go

 

still searching for an acceptable critical overview about peter joseph and jacque fresco's suspicious multi-media project i didn't found much useful sources - but it's somehow quite disturbing to see how well and obviously organised their public relation department works:
the french wikipedia-entry is currently off-line, the german one seems to have frequent fits and is still fought over by a few critics versus (virtual?) legions of over-zealous fan boys constantly drowning any arguments with more or less "automatisized" statements.
this strange group mind obviously won the battle on the english wikipedia entry - achieving an unopposed indiscriminate promotion of the "movement", barely stating any content or context, but including a heap of links to sympathetic statements of celebrities and fan sites, where critical counter-statements get blamed as "repression of progressive ideas coming from a grassroots movement" and sometimes as "leftwing propaganda".
some still promote peter joseph as a founding father, others started to play the "we are..." game, sometimes even trying to play down the importance of the movies as an inspiration for the movement but strictly evading any discussions about the details of the criticism.

some european liberal and left wing newspapers and magazines reported zeitgeist-members in prominent positions of the occupy-actions in zürich, vienna, frankfurt, berlin, los angeles and vancover, the first "speaker of occupy germany" vanished promptly out of public view after he left some impression with a fine stage act in a popular talkshow on public TV - some days before the 17th of september.
in front of the camera he stated, that the 2nd and 3rd zeitgeist movement inspired his media-compatible presented banking-critcism - so the press became curious about his background - but after an alleged murder-treat against his family, reported on the occupygermany site, he vanished completely, the alleged murder treats were obviously never researched.
after "taz"-reports (left-liberal daily newspaper) about the domination of the frankfurt camp (the only one known in germany) by zeitgeists, occupyfrankfurt reacted with a public dissociation explanation/statement, claiming to be still nonpartisan and leaderless - but it's not clear if there were any personal changes following the dissociation. zeitgeist activists were banning leftwing and trade union youth banners from the camp and opposed the installation of info-points of other organisations while supporting the usual zeitgeist-promotion at every opportunity.
funny thing besides:
a "taz" journalist applied to the federal office of the sect referral agency in berlin for an official explanation/statement and received a "we don't know much about zeitgeist, but some aspects remind very much on strategies used by scientology".

bit of a view on the anti-semitic accusations against zeitgeist media:
(coming from some people working on a article about "antisemitism research")

 

The first Zeitgeist movie was mostly conspiracy theories and not very good ones at that. However, Moving Forwards made a lot of good points as far as addressing the problem. It didn't really tell me anything that I didn't already know but I would definitely suggest the first half of that movie as a starting point when it comes to analysing the current economic system. GDP is a fucking stupid system and its nice to see someone addressing it. The solution sounds great but it ignores tons of factors and, realistically, is never going to happen. I mean, I like Star Trek as much as the next guy but we already have cities, knocking them down just to build new eco cities seems somewhat... counter productive. Also, their model doesn't really take into account freedom of choice which is the problem with most societal models.

 

'Cause it's a waste of time, would be for show and wouldn't change a damn thing?

Obama just signed NDAA into law for no good reason; proof that the US doesn't always, or ever, need a reason to do things that are morally indefensible, or that harm their people.

That's only really useful when it's a story that is worth upending, because there's any reliable evidence it's dodgy. There isn't any reliable evidence that what we were told about 9/11 was dodgy. There's a shitload of evidence that what we were told AFTER 9/11 was dodgy, but it's harder to pick apart spin than stories, and people in the US protested against the war relentlessly ANYWAY and it still did nothing. The big thing here is that knowing what happened doesn't change what did happen, that being that wars were started for no good reason.

If you knew THE TRUTH, whom would you inform? The US still invaded Iraq, even when THE TRUTH (that there were no WMD) was publicly known and internationally agreed upon. THE TRUTH doesn't harm evil states, it just makes us feel better. And we have more important things to do than feel better.

 

Translation: "Whether or not I'm right (although I think I am), anybody who argues or attempts to criticise the almighty Zeitgeist is wrong." - Very anarchist.

 

Although I strongly disagree with Mr. Maritoni's views on this subject, I find your re-interpretation of his comment to be complete bullshit and questioning whether or not this young man is anarchist or not from a request to keep things civil and relevant as far as cohesive rebuttal's is also bullshit. Justin is about as anarchist as they come, and is one of the sweetest human beings I know...I don't know you personally Derek Danger, but through your comments on this board I find you extremely arrogant and overbearing so far...look in the mirror next time you want to question anybody's "anarchist credentials".

 

I never said I had the right to question anybody's "anarchist credentials", or that mine are particularly good. I just got very pissed off at the end of his statement there; I would've left it alone, had he not suggested that Anarchists should be "allies" with Zeitgeist-cronies. I want nothing less than to be thought of as a friend of the Zeitgeist, and if that means alienating people, then what do I care?

 

Like trots, the more we alienate zeitgeisters, the better.

 

So this is what you both get from these lines...??? I call bullshit elitism.

 

Well, somebody hasn't been following the game at all. I don't care what came before the lines that drew my ire (and I've already explained this, so it feels a bit tedious repeating it, but if one of us is clutching at straws, I suppose the other must remove them from grasp), the point is that the conclusion erased any good that the setup may have done, by calling for tolerance and unity with people who believe in Zeitgeist. If Anarchists are to jump in bed with the Zeitgeist brigade, why don't we invite people to reading groups to lecture us about Dianetics? Or sponsor a David Icke seminar tour?

I disagree with the views espoused by people who like Zeitgeist, and y'know what? I wouldn't break a sweat to defend their right to say those things, either.

 

Well you've drawn my ire on repeated occasions yet I haven't called you on any of them until this post, yet somehow you've appointed yourself as the person that calls people out on this forum with whatever it is you disagree with, as you've stated in other posts. I really could care less what it is you would, or wouldn't break a sweat about defending. He clearly states that there are some things he agrees with about it, and others he doesn't agree with. The part that gets me about the way you come off on this forum is the way you disrespect in a very obvious way with disregard. You think it's cute to to type ridiculous innuendo such as you do in your first sentence above? It doesn't call for tolerance or unity it calls for civility and common discourse and maybe, just maybe, we can show some of these lost people why it is that anarchism is a much more qualitative solution that espouses some of the same discourse without the toxicity that Zeitgeist carries with it. But if you believe that peoples opinions remain concrete and are always above the influence of wisdom, and that ridicule is a much more effective communication tool then you really should go somewhere else to push your views.

 

Clearly.

 

This is what I was agreeing about and couldn't have said it better myself butcher, you want to defend your buddy and make it seem as though I'm being hypocritical, fine. But don't start that same bullshit that our German friends were doing on here. I simply took issue with this post more than the others because Justin Maritoni is a good friend of mine and I happen to know that he lives, eats, and breathes anarchism every day, he has been living collectively for the last 6 years or so and believe me he is no Zeitgeister, however they have convinced him in part that some of their ideas are viable regardless of the many many times I have warned him about their hidden agendas. Still this is no reason to look down your nose at anyone and feel infinitely more enlightened on the subject. Save that shit.

 

Absolutely insane. How do you treat a child who does not yet understand how to speak his or her mind? Do you strike them by word or by hand? Is there a difference? Do you attack their very will to learn and grow by attempting to convince them they will never really understand anything and it is a waste of time to try? Or do you scoff and turn your head in superior fashion? Is there a difference? Such arrogance harms this world and any chance we have of attaining a healthy equilibrium with it and each other. In other words, GET OVER YOURSELF! I don't give a shit if some one hates zeitgeist or loves it blindingly as I once did or if they see eye to eye with me now and view the zeitgeist films as partially rational and partially insane. If you are prepared to make such a big deal out of a simple opinion and enter social warfare with everyone who disagrees with you, whether or not you are right or wrong, I see you as a threat to the future of our species. I see you as someone who desperately needs to be reminded we are all children, we are all weak sometimes, we all need loved ones to be strong for us sometimes and help us reach or remember a higher understanding. And sometimes we need to be strong for others and assist others find or re-discover their way. This principal is essential to a healthy community and certainly essential to any form of working anarchism! Will you understand me? Will you understand my intentions? Or will you disregard this and look for a weakness in my argument? Or perhaps a fundamental flaw in my identity with which you can exploit in order to further your own obvious superiority? If that is the case, please allow me to save us some time. I AM THE WORST ANARCHIST if that title can even be applied! I work and pay taxes. I pay rent. I drive a minivan. It doesn't run on good intentions. I pay for what it does run on. I buy food and alcohol and while I share these things with my loved ones I could send the money to starving people in the 3rd world and literally feed dozens of people every single day but I do not. I am a wretched creature of good intentions and ill action. I contribute to the demise of all that I love. I am a child. Please do not forget that no matter your achievements you are as well. You are no better than me and I am no better than you. If you cannot find common ground with someone you disagree with and treat them with respect, you cannot be an efficient diplomat. If you cannot be an efficient diplomat, you cannot assist in the construction of a bridge between a corrupt today and a desired tomorrow. That is what I believe anyway.