Zeitgeist Movement = most hardcore NWO propaganda ever.

Originally posted by TerraX
Well, there ya go. Thanks for explaining your motivation, not that it was hard to see.

I'd hope not, look at the title of this thread.

I'm not a member of that particular ZM forum but I am a member in another country.

Thats the official forum.

In my experience, a lot of people who criticize Zeitgeist actually don't have a full grasp of what the movement proposes and the motivation for that is selfish reasoning.

Go spend a good night or 2 reading my blog site(s) that span about 5 years... and you'll see that few others could have pinpointed everything its about better than I. I hate to toot my own horn, but just about everything it embodies just so happens to be my forte.

What about my property?

Right. The AI global computer network doesnt get to kick me out of my home to better distribute resources. The things I've worked for are MINE. Yes, MINE!

What about my gun?

Try to take my things and you might meet my guns?

What about my money?

Correct. Units of measure. The fiat currency is a scam, the ultimate scam... but I've begged ZM/VP people to explain how we get rig of any concept of 'credits' or units of measurement and havent just yet noticed a solid response...

Q: How could the ZM be implemented without a totalitarian regime to enforce it? Don't forget the idea of the ZM is that its to be global in scale.

A: Through agreement.

As has already been beaten to death, once people dont agree to this system it will HAVE to be enforced... globally. That's why I didnt bother responding to it originally, as the entire premise of the question already negated his response.

Q: How is it any different than Communism?

A: Communism is run by a ruling class of politicians. A Resource Based Economy isn't. It is a systems approach using science. Communism is nationalistic. A Resource Based Economy is humanistic. Communism doesn't even begin to address the problem of scarcity by offering solutions, instead it offers rationing. A Resource Based Economy doesn't promote rationing, it promotes access.

So VP will be run by a ruling class of Strong AI computer networks and technocrats. Same thing the NWO is setting up....

VP is globalistic... even if you make the 'tirbe' global in scale, it will need enemies, and enemies will becoem the heretics, the 'terrorists' who oppose it. This is the nature of things. South Park did an excellent 2 part episode titles "Go God Go", where evolution triumphs and all religion disappears. Cartman gets frozen under an avalanche and is thawed out 400 years in the future. Humans (and evolved otters) are still at war... it appears as if they're at war over which science is better... PLOT SPOILER WARNING: but in fact they're at war over which groups has the better name.
en.wikipedia.org...

The lesson is people will always be competitive, and will always fight. You'll have to turn us all into emotionless cyborgs to have any chance of that, and that just might make it worse. Of course politicians exploit this human nature, but even if they didnt, you wont stamp it out minus hardcore social engineering and totalitarianism to stomp out those who dont comply with the re-eductation programs.

I'm all for it, if you want it. There is nothing wrong with private property. The only reason anyone declares something to be their private property is because it ensures nobody else will claim it. In other words, out of fear of a scarcity driven fear of losing whatever piece of property.

Exactly, and when you put central planners (human or AI) in charge of all global resources, if they decide a massive dam has to be built (to ensure the flow of abundance) guess what. Of course he's all for it, but it simply doesn't work with the RE model. AI's and technocrats get control over all global RESOURCES. Game over property rights. PERIOD. The burden of proof is on your people to hammer this facet down CONCRETE....

Do you see anyone declare the air around their house as their "private air"? You don't see that because it is so abundant. There is no scarcity of it, so the very idea sounds absurd.

This example is absurd. Air is... get ready for this... AIR. You'd need a bottle to contain any of it. Someone has to build the bottle... someone has to mine the ores... someone has to build the process to refine and build the bottle... someone has to ship the bottle... someone has to dig the well for the fuel to ship it... and so on...

We breath air in and out. Its up in the AIR. You dont have to work for air. And there obviously isnt any limit to air, its everywhere.

Its too bad they banned me for no reason.

In a Resource Based Economy private property will no doubt be protected, however it will be irrelevant, because nobody would want to steal things from others when everything is readily accessible.

Inherently it CANT be protected. You DONT own it, the system, the world owns it. And then we shift back into this idea that anyone or anything will be smart enough to actually accurately determine what actual resources are available, looking forward into all of the future, from which predictions will it then be determined what is in fact abaundant and what is scarce... and as soon as it screws up people wont cooperate, wont comply, and then the whole system tumbles. The system is categorically DEPENDENT on everyone to comply, and when they dont it inherently fails. EVERYONE (globally) has to agree, for it to work. Think that over for a few...

[edit on 4-4-2010 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]

Even people like Winona Ryder, who have all the money in the world and yet decide to shoplift...they only do so because of the thrill.

And she was auctioning off all of her film schwag in the months before getting caught shoplifting for the thrill? What was the point here?

And how are you going to get rid of all the people who will in fact steal for the thrill, without police???

Everyone who asks these questions is still thinking about these things in terms of how the world works right now. Yes, right now, the idea of "no private property" sounds very dangerous. But don't confuse this with the fact that when we talk about no private property in the future, it doesn't mean that some law will go into effect...rather it is an understanding based on rationally considering the implications of an access based resource system.

Wait, I thought he said there would be private property? Ok, so there wont. Tell that to all the people who have work hard their whole lives in getting their dreams. Sorry, yo, your house is too big and uses up too many resources... we're going to have to ration out your house and move in 2 seperate families. Sorry, too bad if youre twice as motivated and efficient at doing work, because everyone gets a piece now even if lazy. We're scientifically distributing all global resources based on scientific statistics and youre just a number. Isnt science grand?

If you have access to something, whenever you need it, what does it matter if it is "private" property or not?

Any and all further discussion in this regard is completely mute and irrelevant unless you can hammer down a total answer to the impossible question of how do you negate the need for unit sof measure of worth.

What happens when you begin to look at the entire WORLD'S population as a family like that? Do you see the idea?

Yeah, I've heard it all before, and its nothign new by any stretch of the imagination. NWO propaganda to install roughly the same agenda you people poetically call for...

D: Who will pay for it initially?

Pay for what? This is the wrong question. Money doesn't make the world go round. This is another common misconception. It is AGREEMENT and RESOURCES and TECHNOLOGY that makes the world go round.

No is isnt the worng question. I BEGGED for a transition model... have yet to get one. So in the mean time work and worth are based on units of measurement. Still waiting for the concept of how we avoid needing units of value measurement...

We're hitting brick walls here.

If we all reached the agreement that money was useless, then it would be so.

And thats a BIG IF. Still waiting for someone to tell me what we do when everyone doesnt agree...

If you have 0 dollars or if you have 10,000,000,000 dollars, it doesn't change the laws of chemistry. It doesn't make gravity any more powerful. Money doesn't do ANYTHING. It doesn't make more oil appear in the ground and it doesn't help reduce pollution.
Who will pay for it? Wrong question.

Hmm... Nice plays on numbers, but social science isn't as scientific in such regards as resources.

The question is: where will the resources, technology and agreements come from. The answer: when enough people share the same value system, then these processes will get put into effect.

Thanks. THats ultimately the question I'm screaming here... and how will it work when half the people out there wont comply???????

E: What about the jobs robots cant replace? And who decides who gets the crappy jobs or the good jobs?

Give an example. So called "crappy" jobs will be automated as best they can be, and with other jobs that the technology for automation doesn't exist yet, it could easily be done with remote control drones.

What about the ones that cant be automated? What then. Ths doesnt answer my question: Who decides who has to do the crappy jobs?? Long responses arent inherently actual answers, btw.

And while we're at it, what happens if lots of crappy jobs best hope for replacement require more resources than having humans just do it? Since there's already over 6 BILLION of us already existent, I can easily argue that building robots to do our jobs for us is a waste of resources.

For certain other jobs... eventually automation would become so capable of even things like treating emergency victims, that it would be used for virtually everything, allowing humans to not have to do "work" but rather to make music, art, research, have fun, write books, without needing to do it for profit. Without needing to worry about funding, etc.

So... during this transistion... that has yet to be outlined... why would new doctors bother to go thru 8+ years of school to be doctors, when they'll just be replaced anyways???

There's an interesting premise proposed suggecting that art is for everyone, writing is for everyone, science is for everyone... but in truth we all have our own FREE interests and talents. So, to add to my list of impossible questions, how do you mandate that people born to be surgeons do art instead?

F: Are there ANY comparable examples of this system in history that worked?

Originally posted by TerraX
G: What evidence exists to support the idea of the Resource Economy, that is the "abundance" part that is crucial to the feasability of the utopia.

It's actually the "access" that is most important. If you understand, fully, what a resource based economy is, you quickly realize it's not about resources, but rather the ACCESS to those resources.

It takes WORK to reach ALL resources,

We have an OVER abundance of many resources today, such as grain, and yet...people in third world countries do not get any of it. Why? Because we restrict their access to it.

So, the farmers are all hoarding their grain? What if they were? Who will ENFORCE them sharing their wealth, their resources?

Instead, units of peoples worth dictate how much they have access to. Take, for instance, King Crab & Snow Crab... You'll NEED machines at least as capable as humans to harvest them. PERIOD. And who decides how much crab people get per year if you even get the robots to do the job? Do the lazy people get as much? How would you ration that out?

Now, when you produce abundance, this reduces the probability that anyone will not have access to something, but it's not enough to just have abundance, you must also create infrastructure to create availability, or, ACCESS to those goods.

OK, but we're all still waiting for the science behind this allegid abundance....

Also, that word utopia is a misnomer. Nobody in this movement is under any sort of delusion that such a thing is even possible. So please, I hope you don't continue to use that word thinking that anyone here believes it is even a real possibility.\

By all definitions, every single possible facet of VP thus far proposed is utopian by every possible standard. I'm speaking in total absolutes in this regrad, while I might just be amongst the most weary out there when it comes to speaking in absolutes.

But wait, now none of you think VP is even a posssibility? Am I getting this right? I', sorry. but you're statement there is currently open to interpretation... and JF alreadu said that 'ancient' language that is open to interpretation is unaccectable... so I hate to break it but you might not be VP material.

o you truly believe that there is any one size fits all approach to the entire globe and all of its social systems?

No, but that doesn't mean we can't promote science-based methods of providing everyone with access to goods and services that allow for everyone's human rights to be met, and an elevated quality of life at the same time.

So, what exactly are these "rights" we have access to?


I'm sorry, but having to respond to these absurd "answers" is getting to be embarassing.

NONE of the CORE questions I've proposed to the very feasibility of this upoian (which IS what it is) system have even been touched. Therefore, I wont continue to bother wasting my time resonding to every line of these sub-par softball answers. We all NEED CONCRETE answers and models.

In hindsight, I now realize why intitially I only responded to his statements by quoting those that confirm the reality of the reality proposed by this utopian ideal.

Wow IgnoranceIsn'tBliss, you're of the quick typing kind. I can't respond to a lot of the issues you raise right now since I'm off in a bit to my brothers house and I'm planning to raid his fridge. Having dinner there and a few brews. (It's Easter.)
But I gotta ask, why the opposition to Zeitgeist while many of the elements within that movement are already apparent in our present day society and are also a consequence of technological evolution? Just look at smart bombs, super-computers, automation of factories, etc. Zeitgeist and the Venus Project can cease to exist at this very moment and the current capitalistic/free market system will continue to enhance those exact same computer abilities.

I also don't understand your fear about a society in which you're controlled as an individual. You claim such a thing would happen in the society that ZM and TVP suggests but (from my perspective) you seem to be completely oblivious to the fact that the same thing is happening right now, albeit through a monetary system. I go on the presumption that ZG and TVP stands for individual liberty and access to all the necessities of life. Right now you have to work and pay for those same necessities and you're only as free as your purchasing power allows.

I guess what I'm saying is, you accuse the ZM and TVP as being a dictatorial society/movement in the making but you don't realize that you're in one right now. Anyway, lots to discuss.

P.S.
What is the url of your blog?
Have a good Easter.

Originally posted by TerraX
But I gotta ask, why the opposition to Zeitgeist while many of the elements within that movement are already apparent in our present day society and are also a consequence of technological evolution? Just look at smart bombs, super-computers, automation of factories, etc. Zeitgeist and the Venus Project can cease to exist at this very moment and the current capitalistic/free market system will continue to enhance those exact same computer abilities.

ZM/VP (ZP) embrace a total machine takeover, and thats what the NWO is building just the same. ZP doesn't even question if that's even a good idea.

I looked thru the ZP official materials and didn't notice anything about the inherent potenially distatrous problems that a machine takeover (MT) poses. Like the 'government' MT agenda , I view this lack of follow-thru reckless, or something far worse.

Perhaps my foundation of distrust with ZP all begins with the fact that they present it as if they are the only other solution to the problems we reside in. Look up: False Dichotomy. Anything that takes such a stance when promoting a total machine takeover, is, in short, my nemesis.

don't understand your fear about a society in which you're controlled as an individual. You claim such a thing would happen in the society that ZM and TVP suggests but (from my perspective) you seem to be completely oblivious to the fact that the same thing is happening right now, albeit through a monetary system.

Please read the title of this thread, and maybe the rest of the thread. I don't know where anyone would get the impression I support either the NWO or the system as it is (we're already living under the NWO).

Some problems are corporatism (corps have the same rights as human beings), and crony capitalism. The system is deliberately designed to screw you over more, the less you have / make. Here's an idea that proves there might be options other than ZP: a system not deliberately designed to screw everyone.

I go on the presumption that ZG and TVP stands for individual liberty and access to all the necessities of life. Right now you have to work and pay for those same necessities and you're only as free as your purchasing power allows.

Of course ZP claims to support liberties, but theres absolutely no way it can work without a total handover of all privacy. The reason is the machine system will have to monitor every single resource, meaning every one of us every possible moment that it can to track our usage of resources. That last bit is already happening, so I guess we're making good progress towards the ZP?

ignoranceisfutile.wordpress.com...

Cheers, but dont forget that in ZP's world there wont be any religion, so you might as well hang up things like Easter now to get this thing going!

[edit on 5-4-2010 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
ZM/VP (ZP) embrace a total machine takeover, and thats what the NWO is building just the same. ZP doesn't even question if that's even a good idea.

No, not in the way that you imply. ZM does stand for automation but not without human control. Do you really think people are that stupid to give a computer total control? The computer would be there for objective analysis but in the end we humans decide. You're having some kind of nightmare about machines taking over here. Machines do what you program them to do. And how come you know what the NWO is building just the same right now? Shouldn't you take the fight to them, here and now, instead of accusing ZM and TVP of doing the same when it's not even a reality? Get your priorities straight.

Perhaps my foundation of distrust with ZP all begins with the fact that they present it as if they are the only other solution to the problems we reside in. Look up: False Dichotomy. Anything that takes such a stance when promoting a total machine takeover, is, in short, my nemesis.

As I mentioned before ZG and TVP are a work in progress and ultimately there must be agreement on democratic principles. If I may be so bold, I think this entire thread is just you projecting your fears on Zeitgeist. I've seen this a number of times, especially from Americans with anti-government sentiments. They have a disliking for government interference (mostly originating from the fact that they have to pay income tax) and have a sort of 'how we conquered the West attitude.' The old cowboy way of riding on horseback and nobody tells you what to do.
And that is just selfish reasoning. Nobody can tell you what to do or even give suggestions how to lead your life. It's you and not giving a flying f**k about the rest of the world. Your distrust of Zeitgeist runs a little deeper then you let on, in my opinion. Again, relax. If you don't want to live in a modern city that TVP promotes, then don't. Just ride your horsey over the great plains. That's your property right? You won that country fair and square from the Indians.

Some problems are corporatism (corps have the same rights as human beings), and crony capitalism. The system is deliberately designed to screw you over more, the less you have / make. Here's an idea that proves there might be options other than ZP: a system not deliberately designed to screw everyone.

A free market system or monetary will always produce the same result. Think of it as a pond with many fish. They'll simply start to eat each other and the one that grows the fastest will develop an advantage over the smaller fish and will continue to grow until none can touch it and subsequently it will dominate the pond. There is no fair economic system. You Americans have great difficulty letting go of that concept. You think that with hard work you can be a millionaire and it is possible, but where 1 succeeds, 1000s must fail. There isn't room for a nation consisting exclusively of millionaires, the system needs losers in order to support itself. Understand the system.

Of course ZP claims to support liberties, but theres absolutely no way it can work without a total handover of all privacy. The reason is the machine system will have to monitor every single resource, meaning every one of us every possible moment that it can to track our usage of resources. That last bit is already happening, so I guess we're making good progress towards the ZP?

Again there's the fear projection. A total handover of privacy. I'm curious, where did you read in the material that people should be chipped (or something of that nature)? Where did you read that camera's would be put up in your own home? Zeitgeist or The Venus Project made no mention of it whatsoever. I, and a lot of other folks I imagine, wouldn't stand for it. Monitoring resources would be, in my estimate, managing the crops and power/energy systems. Not 'human resources'.

Cheers, but dont forget that in ZP's world there wont be any religion, so you might as well hang up things like Easter now to get this thing going!

Well in ZP's world, every day would be a holiday. You actually think I would mind.

Originally posted by TerraX
No, not in the way that you imply.

a utopian presentation of a money-free and computer-driven vision of the future... a futuristic society where (adjust your seatbelts, now) machines would control government and industry and safeguard the planet’s fragile resources by means of an artificially intelligent “earthwide autonomic sensor system” — a super-brain of sorts connected to, yes, all human knowledge.
www.nytimes.com...

The ideal society, proposed by the project, would have a worldwide automated computer system actively monitoring the levels of the world's surveyed resources and ranking them according to factors such as their potential, renewability, and pollution. This computer would intelligently make objective decisions as to the uses of these resources based on empirical fact, not biased legislation.
www.huffingtonpost.com...

Hmm... why does this all sound so familiar?

ZM does stand for automation but not without human control.

Regardless of how they might have spun it, thatss exactly what it is. It's right there in those articles they hold up high and proud on the official ZM page.

Do you really think people are that stupid to give a computer total control?

Yes. Especially deluded ones. Like people who claim to be futurists yet don't reference other futurist whom they've borrowed ideas from, and who conveniently fail to mention the Law of Accelerating Returns or the Technological Singularity while promoting the machine takeover.

en.wikipedia.org...
en.wikipedia.org...
www.kurzweilai.net...
en.wikipedia.org...

The computer would be there for objective analysis but in the end we humans decide.

You speak as if its a box, here and there, that processes some spreadsheets and some graphs and prints them out when we press the right key. If you don't understand the technology they're proposing then you're doomed to try and debate it.

They're embracing a GLOBAL network of ubiquitous INTELLIGENT machines hooked into all human knowledge. These machines have to be smarter than humans because of the fact that humans are NOT smart enough to manage the resources in the ways ZP decribes. This system will be so deeply hooked into controlling all facets of literally everything there would be essentially no way to unhook it. Now hook all of these up as a global brain and prepare for the hard takeoff.

Hey this sounds familiar, again. Like a page right out of a Ray Kurzweil book.

You're having some kind of nightmare about machines taking over here. Machines do what you program them to do.

Not when they're smarter than humans, growing in intelligence and capabilities exponentially.

And how come you know what the NWO is building just the same right now? Shouldn't you take the fight to them, here and now, instead of accusing ZM and TVP of doing the same when it's not even a reality? Get your priorities straight.

NWO is:
ignoranceisfutile.wordpress.com...
ignoranceisfutile.wordpress.com...
ignoranceisfutile.wordpress.com...
ignoranceisfutile.wordpress.com...
singularityu.org...
ignoranceisfutile.wordpress.com...

Google Video Link

ignoranceisfutile.wordpress.com...
ignoranceisfutile.wordpress.com...
ignoranceisfutile.wordpress.com...
ignoranceisfutile.wordpress.com...

And the global infrastructure:
ignoranceisfutile.wordpress.com...
ignoranceisfutile.wordpress.com...
ignoranceisfutile.wordpress.com...
ignoranceisfutile.wordpress.com...

So as you can see, I've been opposing ZP since before there even was a ZP. I've even been opposing most of what ZP opposes. I applauded the first half of Addendum... and then my jaw dropped.

The thing about ZP is the 2 films were deliberately incrementally released to co-opt a lot of the same minds that might be browsing some of my stuff, or similiar alternative views. It's like the Obama version of the mainstream. Obama is the ultimate mainstream PR frontman, and ZP is the equivalent for the alternative thinkers. I'll oppose this system in any form it attempts to take on.

As I mentioned before ZG and TVP are a work in progress and ultimately there must be agreement on democratic principles.

ZP is a monolitic global dictatorship. It's already laid out in absolutes what NEEDS to be, or not to BE. Going thru the materials and statements I see the words "has to be" and "needs" all about instead of "maybes" or "perhaps". The ideology behind these demogouges already displays control, but then they say 'oh, but you'll have privacy'.

There's nothing democratic about this system. It will HAVE TO monitor our every moment, it WILL control all global resources, it will be doen globally, it WILL have to be enforced. You might (not likely) manage to get people to democratically elect thsi system, and then it ends there.

Again, relax. If you don't want to live in a modern city that TVP promotes, then don't.

ZP doesnt promote merely modern cities, it promotes total global control that every single human being is subject to. As was beatento death early in the thread, it simply cannot work without total global control.

But if you people want to have your own cities where you manage YOUR OWN resources I'm all for it, just so long as others get their own cities (libertarian, anarchist, etc) free from being subject to you people, then this is my ideal world. The federal government is already monolithic in too many ways preventing my ideal scenario where we can choose what type of communities we live in and are free from oppression.

A free market system or monetary will always produce the same result.

Speaking in such simple terms, a communistic system (like ZP) will always produce the same result.

Think of it as a pond with many fish. They'll simply start to eat each other and the one that grows the fastest will develop an advantage over the smaller fish and will continue to grow until none can touch it and subsequently it will dominate the pond.

So you tune the system to prevent that, instead of encourage it. There will never be one sole solution, as ZP claims. It claims its the ONLY solution for EVERYONE. Anything that claims that is destined for tyranny.

There isn't room for a nation consisting exclusively of millionaires, the system needs losers in order to support itself. Understand the system.

Everyone doesnt need to be millionaires to live GOOD. If people werent so lazy they could boost their own quality of life several notchs just by growing an exotic vegetable garden, alone. A system that rewarads laziness however, will fail. ZP will fail!

Zeitgeist or The Venus Project made no mention of it whatsoever. I, and a lot of other folks I imagine, wouldn't stand for it. Monitoring resources would be, in my estimate, managing the crops and power/energy systems. Not 'human resources'.

It must manage ALL GLOBAL resources, including human resources. It will need to know how much of everything is being consumed by everyone. It will need to know what is abundant and what is scarce. It will need to know EVERYTHING to be able to do its job. Under ZP, basically all humans are consumers, instead of producers. Since we're the ones consuming, it will have to monitor us and RATION things to us based on its projections of available resources. It will also have to police us that we properly dispose of everyu possible thing in order to do its just. Otherwise, as soon as someone gets lazy and doesnt properly dispose of something the projection models will fail. And so on.

ZP needs the AGI supercomputers, total global control, robot drones that are more capable than humans, and for everyone on earth to agree with it. Talked about doomed for failure to become a cute and cuddly thing like ZP promotes.

But once we get there, the AGI connected robot slave army large enough to do all of the work for all of the earths inhabitants will logically conclude that we're the big threat to resources... begin scifi-horror movie. Or, before building the robot army, the logical choice would be that building billions of robot is itself a waste of resources. So now we have to actually do work, and somebody or something will be deciding who does what.

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
The thing about ZP is the 2 films were deliberately incrementally released to co-opt a lot of the same minds that might be browsing some of my stuff, or similiar alternative views.

The proof is in the title of the second film itself: "addendum"...

An addendum, in general, is an addition to a certain document, subsequent to its edition, publication or diffusion. ...an addendum (sometimes referred to as an "appendix") is a supplemental addition to a given main work. It may correct errors, explain inconsistencies or otherwise detail or update the information found in the main work, especially if any such problems were detected too late to correct the main work. For example, the main work could have had already been printed and the cost of destroying the batch and reprinting is deemed too high. As such, addendums may come in many forms — a separate letter included with the work, text files on a digital medium, or any similar carrier.
en.wikipedia.org...

So, considering that PJ had already covered the Federal Reserve system in part1, it would appear that the actual film would be part one that ends with the second half of part 2 as the last segment. The language at the end of part 1 leads up to it, as I recall. I suppose you could amend the Federal Reserve segment of part 1 with that of part 2; you just lay the part 2 version over the part one version.

Or it could be said that recovering the FR was a good excuse to release the real agenda of the title in a later to be released 'sequel'.Therefore, it could be argued that PJ is the great deciever, and ripoff artist (their futurist ideas aren't even original!) of the alternative world.

Seems like a lot of answers regarding the Venus Project can be found here;
www.thezeitgeistmovement.com...

reply to post by Scarcer


Ah...but who would be programming and controlling the computers? My guess would be the same "elites" who are socially engineering ways to control the masses presently. The movement sounds essentially like a re-framing of the current NWO agenda, with some shiny graphical art and an AI-messianic twist thrown in. The propaganda being proposed is way too transparent; unfortunately, there is no "magical fix" to the mess we're in, and attempts to "condition" or "reeducate" the people I suspect is much of the reason why we remain so apathetic and are willing to 'bend over and take it' while the elite classes are raping us of our liberties, property, and what few rights we do have remaining. Anytime I hear the term "reeducate" coming from individuals proposing their ideas are the only viable "solution" to our current plight, I feel extreme skepticism is merited, and is definitely a red flag.

[edit on 10-4-2010 by Morgan Le Fay]

reply to post by TerraX


Well, I thought you and I had a discussion going here but I guess now you've opted to refer me to the read official propaganda over again. Kind of like those people at ZM forums who basically told me to keep reading the materials if I dont get it yet. 'Just keep hardwiring your brain with the euphamistic sooth saying propaganda and you'll agree eventually', is what it really means.

I figure you've read that over enough times that you should be able to explain these hard questions I'm asking and dispute these hard inevitablilities I'm bringing to light, where the offcial materials fall short.

If you'd really like me to take another look at that page, ok but be warned...

First, no mention of the Technological Singularity, Accelerating Change or the problems in facing Strong AI. I linked those in my last response to you hoping you'd weigh in on how these friendly-control-freak futurists fail to mention these in-your-face realities. No honest futurist can talk about the immediate future without offering solutions to the inherent problems technology is ushering in. Instead they just say we need to be "cybernated".

Glancing back over the document:

Today, money is used to regulate the economy for the benefit of the few who control the financial wealth of nations.

No. Money is used to represent the value of time, resources, effort, etc. Laws, treaties, taxes and cronyism are used to regulate the economy to help the little fish get eaten. The system is designed to screw you over more at the bottom and send it to the top, despite the idea that progressive taxation balances it out.

Our problems cannot be solved in a society based on money, waste, and human exploitation.

Right, sort of. The system is designed to exploit humans, but that doesnt mean that is has to be or that ZP is the only other solution. Based on waste? I suppose considering the system strives more and more to break or backs forcing us to buy crappy throw away products instead of being able to invest in products that will last. And the social engineers have us all obsessing over needing new shiny stuff to replace even stuff that is still good. Part of that can be blamed on accelerating change, the law of accelerating returns, as todays technology is obsolete in no time. Its just too bad this model has leaked over into basic goods instead of computational power year to year.

Rationing resources through monetary control is dysfunctional and counter-productive to survival.

Once you strip out the parts where we get screwed by the system, ultimately we self-ration what we can afford to get. ZP proposes it should be the one rationing those resources from the monolithic top down.

We could easily create a world of abundance without servitude and debt through the creation of a global, resource-based civilization.

Still waiting for references on this most crucial element of the proposed utopia...

Today, we have highly advanced technologies but our social and economic development has not kept up.

And JF wants to engineer society, meaning he wants to re-educate individuals how he sees fit. Sorry folks, you might want someone or rather just another zealot to program you and everyone else but count me out!

I am intirgued by his section of what inspired him, but that doesn't mean I'm ready to be 'cybernated' to his liking. He points out that during the Great Depression resources and production capability still existed because no one had any money...

But he forgot to mention how everyone had been screwed by the monolithic government-banking establishment that eveyone had entrusted to serve their best interests, and that food resources were in fact minimal thanks to the 'Dust Bowl' crisis. The GD was engineered, just like the 'Great Recession' and quadrillion $ debt+derivatives bubble we now face. All done by bankster criminals, but we are to simply blame it on "money" (units representing worth and value) alone?

social designs must be based on the carrying capacity of Earth's resources, and not on the philosophy, desires, aesthetics, or advantages of particular people.

Ah, "Social designs". Design society, and the individuals in it. This is obviously top down. He's not asking society to design itself, hes stating how he would design it for us and that the whole world needs his solution.

"Carrying capacity". Now we're getting somewhere, with direct terms from Malthusian Theory. First the earth has limitless resources, but now it has a carrying capacity. And what is the logical conslusion, or climax when the zealots decide there are too many humans in order to maintain the lifestyle of abundance we're all promised? I'd like for you to answer that for me...

And finishing his sentence, I guess nobody should be allowed to live on a lake or river because that would give them an advantage over people who dont. Or, nobody should be allowed to live in the African contintent and they should all be shipped out to more feritle lands. When you move an African family into your house permanently then I'll start listening...

Now this is interesting:

It calls for a scientific redesign of our culture in which war, poverty, hunger, debt, and unnecessary human, suffering are viewed as not only avoidable, but unacceptable.

Whats that comma doing there? The page is a good couple years old now, yet they havent fixed that 'typo'? JF is leaving something open to interpretation. Maybe he isn't ZP material? Could that mean that unecessary humans should be unacceptable?

Simply stated, a resource-based economy focuses on resources rather than money, and provides an equitable distribution thereof in a humane and efficient manner.

The thing is, money is used to represent resources. How is this different from a money based economy? He says it, an "equitable distribution" of resources. What is that? It IS rationing. So what we have, without exception, is about the purest form of communism possible. What makes it different from the Soviet Union? It intends not to have military expenditures. But what happens when nations oppose its overarching reach, it will need a military to either defend itself or to do its 'good duty' of 'making the world safe for the resource economy' (ie plundering and annexing opposing nations).

Shall I read on???

This is all chasing unicorns over the rainbow. Faery tales. Like, yeah the world is screwed up, imagine how it could have been if we were able to intelligently design it from the very beginning. A sort of, if I could go back in time with all we know now and all of our technology. If I knew then what I know now. But the problem with this dream is it even fails to learn from what we do know now, such as what happens every single time zealots try to force their utopias on others, especially while weilding communism and unfettered technology obsession.

And I'm not a fan of how social stratification tends to work itself out, but that doesn't mean its time to implement 'technological stratification' that supercedes humans.

Shall I read on? Eventually I'll make a movie, but I have others to get to first, although ZP is the ultimate one-stop shop that overtly states exactly what I've been trying to tell everyone the system as-it-is is moving towards.


[edit on 10-4-2010 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]

Originally posted by Morgan Le Fay
Anytime I hear the term "reeducate" coming from individuals proposing their ideas are the only viable "solution" to our current plight, I feel extreme skepticism is merited, and is definitely a red flag.

Bingo!

I mean, if I had my way, theres a list of documentaries and articles I'd have people watch that chronicle how BS everything is and how screwed we are, to wake people up. I'd even consider putting in the first half of Zeitgeist Addendum in the list. But when you start talking about implementing a monolithic global government that everyone has no choice but 'agree' on, now we're getting into serious trouble.

Wanting for people to know the facts and actually care about doing something about it is one thing, but when you say you have the only solution for the entire planet it had better be a concrete solid good set of ideas. And if it is dramatically different than what we already know, it had better have deeply detailed models for how to transition it in without tyranny or more suffering.

And if its honest, it will have projections of how much famine, destruction and other suffering that might occur in attempting the transition to 'the promised land'. If it doesn't then that suggests its either self-deluded, or serving a much more sinister purpose such as incrementally conditioning millions to fall into the NWO agenda as it incrementally comes about...

'Oh, look, a new 100% automated robot factory just replaced 10,000 workers... and, theres a new communistic global government in place due to environmental paranioa based on global warming alarmism... and, new brain implant nanotechnology is coming out next year so we can all be "cybernated"... we're almost to the promised land!'

[edit on 10-4-2010 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
No. Money is used to represent the value of time, resources, effort, etc. Laws, treaties, taxes and cronyism are used to regulate the economy to help the little fish get eaten. The system is designed to screw you over more at the bottom and send it to the top, despite the idea that progressive taxation balances it out.

Textbook example of money, but it becomes something else for the elite. Pure means of pressure and control, and that's where you'll find the NWO. Since Zeitgeist advocates the removal of the monetary system that would mean the NWO would lose its grip on the ordinary folks. Yet Americans like yourself who have anti-government sentiments because they don't want the state to interfere with their lives develop the next panic attack and start claiming Zeitgeist is NWO.

How do I make this clear. The NWO has the tools right now - money, power and control, and it works. They don't have to present a society like TVP when their current system is working just fine. They'll keep the monetary system as technology progresses while also keeping it in check.
This thread, Zeitgeist=NWO is a fine example of human behavior. You know what it all boils down to? Self interest.

Originally posted by TerraX
Textbook example of money, but it becomes something else for the elite. Pure means of pressure and control, and that's where you'll find the NWO.

No, control of the cartel styled fractional reserve international banking systems is the control. Not the money itself. Why was a threat to the central bankers when Lincoln crafted the Greenback? Why did PJ bother mentioning that old Rothschild quote 'give me control of a nations money and I care not who makes the laws (in part 1), or how Andrew Jackson campaigned on taking down the central bankers (part 2)? If the All Seeing Eye wasn't on the money you wouldn't find the NWO 'at the money', instead you'd find them at the bank as long as they control it.

Since Zeitgeist advocates the removal of the monetary system that would mean the NWO would lose its grip on the ordinary folks.

Wouldn't removing them from the banking system, unraveling the banking system as it is, striping the corporations of having the same rights as human beings and other measures do the same thing? I want this question to be distinct from related the rhetoric that money is what makes people this way. This is about the actual control of the NWO... Would doing said things crush the control grip of the NWO? If not please describe...

Yet Americans like yourself who have anti-government sentiments because they don't want the state to interfere with their lives develop the next panic attack and start claiming Zeitgeist is NWO.

America is an entire hemisphere, not a single nation. Anyways I think I've outlined many more facets of this being NWO than just being government meddling with my life.

The NWO has the tools right now - money, power and control, and it works. They don't have to present a society like TVP when their current system is working just fine. They'll keep the monetary system as technology progresses while also keeping it in check.

Please refer back to my OP. This all isn't just about the way we interpret the monetary system, although it is an element. The NWO is shifting us towards a global monetary system, although it will be much the same as it is now, worse maybe. Everything else is there, but now that I think of it even PJ pointed out how all the money is becoming virtual. Virtual 'credits' representing units of measure of value.

I'm still waiting for more clarification (from anyone) of how the system can possibly work without units of measure... this is another crucial aspect that should be hammered out in contrete before we go to far over the rainbow with all of this idealism.

How about an 'global government' for "the the global management of our planet" motivated by the international economy and the environment?



I already linked you videos and web pages showing how the establishment is building the global AI supercomputer network "global brain" with billions of sensors monitoring every possible thing, but you never responded and now you're starting to get low brow again.

This thread, Zeitgeist=NWO is a fine example of human behavior. You know what it all boils down to? Self interest.

Let me guess, I'm only motivated by self-interest because of the environment we're all in? And if I allow ZP to give me months of re-education I can see the light? What's wrong with all of those infants and toddlers out there who are more worried about getting hugs and treats from their parents instead of crying themselves to sleep worrying about the starving people of the world? Perhaps they need more TV?

So yeah, self interest. It's just too bad I dont have both a private profit based corporation and an NGO setup to collect income so that I can live with my girlfriend on 25 acres with ponds, lakes, prime landscaping and 10 buildings like good old Fresco does. It must be nice...
anticultist.wordpress.com...
anticultist.wordpress.com...

[edit on 11-4-2010 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
No, control of the cartel styled fractional reserve international banking systems is the control. Not the money itself.

Semantics. Having a large amount of money gives you power and the means to influence others. Money can easily become a method of blackmail. To deny that is sticking your head in the sand. Getting rid of the fractional reserve banking system wont get rid of the influence of (current) billionaires.

Wouldn't removing them from the banking system, unraveling the banking system as it is, striping the corporations of having the same rights as human beings and other measures do the same thing? I want this question to be distinct from related the rhetoric that money is what makes people this way. This is about the actual control of the NWO... Would doing said things crush the control grip of the NWO? If not please describe...

You would have to elaborate on the system you have in mind. Some type of credit? But yes, the suggestions you make would go a long way. (See, we are not that different.)

America is an entire hemisphere, not a single nation. Anyways I think I've outlined many more facets of this being NWO than just being government meddling with my life.

My comments were more directed at the social conditioning of the American people (U.S.) since quite often the fiercest critics of ZG and TVP are people from the United States. There are also some 70.000 ZG members right now so it's not fair to say you're all in the same category. Still, when addressing global problems it's not so farfetched to begin with the U.S. since you're the greatest energy consumers and the greatest polluters and hold the most wealth in the world.

I'm still waiting for more clarification (from anyone) of how the system can possibly work without units of measure... this is another crucial aspect that should be hammered out in contrete before we go to far over the rainbow with all of this idealism.

From my perspective, it can only work if there's general agreement. I'll readily admit that it's a hard goal to achieve and it is pretty idealistic.

How about an 'global government' for "the the global management of our planet" motivated by the international economy and the environment?

Amazing. I come to similar questions as you. How do you see such a thing working while not repeating the mistakes that are made now?

Let me guess, I'm only motivated by self-interest because of the environment we're all in? And if I allow ZP to give me months of re-education I can see the light? What's wrong with all of those infants and toddlers out there who are more worried about getting hugs and treats from their parents instead of crying themselves to sleep worrying about the starving people of the world? Perhaps they need more TV?

It's all about awareness and education. ZG or TVP wont force it on you. It's about you and everyone else on the planet suggesting you get a wake up call and think about how we can improve life. Is that so hard to fathom?

So yeah, self interest. It's just too bad I dont have both a private profit based corporation and an NGO setup to collect income so that I can live with my girlfriend on 25 acres with ponds, lakes, prime landscaping and 10 buildings like good old Fresco does. It must be nice...

If you had the chance, would you take it? Could you escape from the monetary system without becoming a bum?
Regardless of our disagreements, I think we are both learning something.

Originally posted by TerraX
Could you escape from the monetary system without becoming a bum?

It's funny you should ask, hot off the press:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by TerraX

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
No, control of the cartel styled fractional reserve international banking systems is the control. Not the money itself.

Semantics. Having a large amount of money gives you power and the means to influence others. Money can easily become a method of blackmail. To deny that is sticking your head in the sand. Getting rid of the fractional reserve banking system wont get rid of the influence of (current) billionaires.

Not semantics, but you have a point. As an extreme PC user I put my systems thru hell. But even not putting Windows thru hell still has it get corrupt. Most of the people out there who dont understand their OS complain of the system being slow thinking you can just uninstall some things and remove stuff from the HD and it will fix it. The fact is the OS corrupts, and it takes just a few of the wrong kind of non undoable modifiers to bog the system down no matter what you try.

Systems need to be reinstalled (Thomas Jefferson argued the same thing), and the OS in our case (in the US) is the Constitution. But your question is about preventing influence. I can say that no system will ever be perfect, no matter what and that anyone who believes they have a perfect system concept is insane.

A question for you: Would you rather have individuals who command certain degrees of power (spread out across society) because they're genuises or whatever, or a total global monolithic dictatorship in total control of every facet of life? Now remember, just because somoeone has certain pull doesnt mean its automatically the end of the world.

To answer your question, now, I already have in some degree. The true problems with the realities you've mentioned is when cronyism and conglomeration take hold. I've already laid out some ways to stop that. You have to stop too much power. A review of the US political system is a masters course in places to start.

Beyond that there has to be other measures to make things right. "Capitalism" does have a dark side. If you could have safeguards without it requiring intense taxation we'd all be better off. The Federal Reserve has been screwing everyone in the US for 95 years. A big part of the concept of true free market capitalism is that everyone is prosperous, but the reality of this thing falsely labeled the same thing is we've all been screwed for so long there is hardly enough prosperity in the masses to share it around.

This old system has intensified its darkest logical outcome. But then again these tyrants have more or less always held their control. Except this logical outcome is the darkest one, where they've always held control, and have ever gained more precident for conglomeration returning to the days of monarchy. Its important to note that the monarchist types have been allowed for too long to control this system and gear it more towards conglomeration (i.e. 14th Amendment exploitation by corporations).

For new ideas I had thought about the idea that if the wealth incured by natural resources from various regoins went to the people living there. For instance, peoples in oil producing nations hardly get squat, while the monarchs live like gods, where the soil is infertile except it has oil beneath and that is the lands value. But this brings major complications, such as how do you decide other than from a national level how to determine who gets what slice? Once you begin to zoom in it creates all new problems when using the entire list of possible natural resources.

Places with ample resources could get over-run by people even though the actual jobs the extracting of the resources create is slim. Perhaps you could initially divide the resource regions up geographically, but per capita, based on the market value of what the regions contain, I mean averaged out by all participating nations, except the problem is market values change over time on everything. The point is no matter how many of us sit and try to work out this concept into the best thing ever, it cannot possibly be perfect.

Then we would have to consider human suffering. Participating nations could refuse to do business with the non-nations, to expect the citizens to rise up to their governments, but worldwide there will be bloodshed. This idea hasn't worked with Cuba obviously.

The point there is, trying to do this technically, like JF talks about, you have to lay out solid projections of suffering with or without some new policy or system. In the idea of laying out these numbers in order to enact all of JF's plan, JF hasn't provided any projections I have seen. Since he's apparently the leading 'doctor' in "Human Standards" I'd expect him to be the one doing such work (he does make some cool little models with all of his spare time).

No matter what, things will never be perfect for all humans. The only exception would likely be if the worlds elites managed to eliminate 90+% of everybody, and then built millions of robots to do all of their work for them...

I'm not saying humanity doesn't need fresh ideas. I am saying that a better part of the problems humanity faces are deliberately designed by said elites (now including all the new technlogical totalitarianism tech's they have planned out for us). What's important is that worldwide hunger isn't inherent to the human experience merely because of the fact that a certain amount of greed is inherent in human nature.

NOTE: In regards to the current billionaires, most of them aren't get-so-lucky Google Boys, most of them inherited it. The thing is how can you go after someone because they have money? Would you AGREE to this if you had money that you didnt steal from people? It's not like all money was created by plundering everyone like the banksters have. Now we'd be trying to catch the banksters and recover the money they've stole, while undoing contracts they've suckered people into criminally. Beware of the slippery slope, how far down from justice can it slip?

Back onto my little experimental concept from above: You split up the averaged out demographic-to-resources regions... except nobody knows every resource yet to be found! And then we could try to do it multilayered of what can be done both above and below ground, but the question is is anybody smart enough to work out all of the possible problems here to prove it as sensible?

Now mind you this is a single concept, not a total system as JF is arguing for. Humans arent smart enough for the system JF proposes, which creates a "problem" in that we lack the computer AI to do it with. An interesting note is that AI scientists refer to not having the Strong AI as the "Hard Problem". Solve the 'problem'... begin scifi-horror movie.

What I can say is that I certainly don't have all the answers, as no matter how smart I am I'm just one person. JF is no exception to this rule, and the problem with his hierarchy is it isn't very open to outside influence.

A simple question: Would you ever live in a society or system where you had no influence?

In one way I AGREE is that people need to be able to AGREE on a new system. And if its too radical and dangerous people wont agree. There has to be a way to serve justice without it being unjust, and of creating a system an overwhelming majority could agree on...

It might be time to return to the City-State... but odds are war will never end.

[edit on 12-4-2010 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]

Sorry but i see comparisons made between the Zeitgeist movement and Socialism etc all the time and it is all completely unfounded. Its like these people have never watched the movies. The fact that ALL forms of political belief systems and religions are attacked as being obsolete, it is even stated that "The State won't do anything as there will be NO State"

The motivations of the movement are quite clear, those who believe that TZM are part of some NWO conspiracy are barking up the wrong tree IMHO.

If you can't envisage a life like the one detailed in the venus project then you can't have much faith in humanity, the venus project vision is an inevitability if we want ot sustain ourselves as a species, the sooner we realise that the better.

Peace

Originally posted by electrobadgr
Sorry but i see comparisons made between the Zeitgeist movement and Socialism etc all the time and it is all completely unfounded.

What do you know about socialism? Have you done an in depth research thrust into these sorts of political systems both in concept and in history? If not I hope you get around to that sometime. But for now here's a crash course:

When the government controls an industry, say public schools, it is in effect socialized (in particular if the only option for schooling is via the government). The difference between socialism and communism is that communism is total socialism, as in every possible sector and industry is controled by the government, but in the context as they are the arbitators, the ones who you get 'it' from. This even goes beyond mere taxes, as they provide it to you without an actual bill you have to pay. It's built into the system.

When JF says that communism still has social stratification he is blatently LYING. The entire premise of communism is that there aren't any social classes involved, everyone get the same services and 'wealth' based on... get ready for this... available resources.

I encourage you to do a quick look into what socialism and communism actually entail, and then compare that to the ZP:

Communism is a social structure in which classes are abolished and property is commonly controlled, as well as a political philosophy and social movement that advocates and aims to create such a society.

Karl Marx posited that communism would be the final stage in society, which would be achieved through a proletarian revolution and only possible after a socialist stage develops the productive forces, leading to a superabundance of goods and services.
en.wikipedia.org...

JF argues for no classes or private property, superabundance via "his" ideas, and that "his" ideas are the eventual outcome of the final stages of productive (robot) forces.

Stateless communism, also known as pure communism, is the post-capitalist stage of society which Karl Marx predicted would inevitably result from the development of the productive forces. Stateless communism is closely related and connected to world communism.
en.wikipedia.org...

Note that all throughout this thread I charge ZP as being the purest form of communism possible. And then note that "Pure Communism" is also refered to as "Stateless Communism", which is exactly what ZP claims is possible: 'no' state... global.

Classless society refers to a society in which no one is born into a social class. Such distinctions of wealth, income, education, culture, or social network as might arise, in such a society would only be determined by individual experience and achievement. Since these distinctions are difficult to avoid, advocates, such as socialists, communists, etc. of a classless society propose various means to achieve and maintain it and attach varying degress of importance to it as an end in their overall programs/philosophy. en.wikipedia.org...

Its like these people have never watched the movies.

I'm sorry, but...

Please do yourself a huge favor and do some extensive research into propaganda, and then afterwards reflect that on what you've been 'taught' by ZM/VP.

BTW: I've possibly watched their movies more than you have.

The fact that ALL forms of political belief systems and religions are attacked as being obsolete, it is even stated that "The State won't do anything as there will be NO State"

Karl Marx would agree:

"Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people. en.wikipedia.org...

Ok, on that last part, if they get their dream of a total machine takeover, there woudlnt be a state like any we've ever known. But by definition, an institution tasked with managing and rationing resources IS a government.

That bit about the "state", is that an actual official quote, and if so where can I find it? The FACT is thats a play on words, of course there wouldnt be a "state", because it would be a GLOBAL government. There wouldnt be any "states", but other than with a state of total global ANARCHY
there WOULD still be a government.

The motivations of the movement are quite clear, those who believe that TZM are part of some NWO conspiracy are barking up the wrong tree IMHO.

If I'm wrong then you have an endless barage of fodder to choose from in this lengthy thread. You might consider reading it.


[edit on 13-4-2010 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]

reply to post by electrobadgr


Since this thread is about the NWO, for fun we review the goals of the Illuminati.

The 6 tenets of the Illuminati:

Abolition of Monarchy and Ordered Government

Abolition of Property

Abolition of Inheritance

Abolition of Patriotism

Abolition of Family

Abolition of Religion

How is that different than the TZM??









[edit on 13-4-2010 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]