A Review of “Zeitgeist - Moving Forward”
The “Zeitgeist Movement” was launched by former New York City musician, Peter Joseph - otherwise known as Peter Jospeh Merola with his first Zeitgeist Movie in 2007. This first Zeitgeist film doccumentary was very controversial with Christians because it challenged their historical religious beliefs. In 2008, there was Zeitgeist - The Addendum and now in 2011 we have Zeitgeist - Moving Forward.
The second Zeitgeist film documentary introduced the infamous Venus Project as a utopian ideal based on some of Jacque Fresco’s ideas involving modern technology. Jacque Fresco who is now in his 90’s was popular in the 1970’s and in 1974 he was was interviwed by Larry King.
By relying heavily on Jordan Maxwell’s research for the first Zeitgeist film, Peter Joseph Merola focuses on religion, 911 and global banking conspiracies to reel in those who are seeking for solutions.
Ed Griffin offers a critical review of Zeitgeist - The Addendum and it is posted at this website: http://infowars.wordpress.com/2008/10/13/zeitgeist-addendum-a-critical-review
Zeitgeist 3 - Moving Forward, is being shown at theatres all over the world this week. Any film documentary being launched in over 20 languages, in 60 countries all over the world needs an abundance of usury-based, debt money to finance such a proejct. So one key question is where is Peter Joseph Merola getting the money to finance the Zeitgeist film documentaries? If we could follow the money, we would know lots more about the agenda behind the Zeitgeist Movement. My observation at this time - is just be cautious!
Zeitgeist - Moving Forward will be online beginning January 25th, 2011. Full details will be psoted at this website: http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com Here is the synopsis explaining this new film documentary, BUT you may need a dictionary to understand.
“Zeitgeist - Moving Forward, by director Peter Joseph, is a feature length documentary work which will present a case for a needed transition out of the current socioeconomic monetary paradigm which governs the entire world society. This subject matter will transcend the issues of cultural relativism and traditional ideology and move to relate the core, empirical “life ground” attributes of human and social survival, extrapolating those immutable natural laws into a new sustainable social paradigm called a “Resource-Based Economy.”
I watched “Zeitgeist - Moving Forward” at the Mayfair Theatre in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada on Sunday, January 16, 2011. My observation was that the theatre was almost filled and the majority of those in attendance were younger than myself. The film documentary was two hours and forty-five minutes in length - too long for any film documentary no matter how good it claims to be. And there was too much repitition - like the computer number and the footsteps - making is seem like subtle brainwashing techniques along with monotone voice and selected mood music.
No talk of earth ships or eco-villages but lots of promotion for the major city template known as the Venus Project. An example of a much smaller, sovereign and sustainable community would be the Mandala Village Project as outlined at this website: http://www.mandalavillage.org
There is much about the Zeitgeist Movement that must be questioned and we must in turn question the answers. Hopefully, the creators of the Zeitgeist Movement are open-minded human beings who will correct some errors or flaws in future presentations.I reject censorship and promote critical thinking and I trust that many others who are seeking solutions will do likewise.
For example, I reject the statement that “profits are the root of all our problems today.” Instead, I suggest that the design flaw of usury on our orthodox, economic system of usury-based, debt money is the root cause of violence, wars, poverty, scarcity and lack. Nowhere in the film documentary did I hear the word “usury.” I did hear the word “interest” discussed on issues regarding our monetary system. I suppose that Peter Joseph Merola does not know that “Life Without Usury” is possible again in this 21st Century.
Rather than “profits” causing greed and selfishness, I suggest that it is “usury” and its effects on debtors that causes brains to become hard-wired with elements of greed and selfishness - just to survive in a rigged economic game. The debtors are forever scrambling at their roles and duties to acquire sufficient dollars to pay their monthly usury and taxes - not knowing that the majority of their taxes goes directly as “usury” payments being exacted by their creditors.
I daresay that when people have cleansed their minds of the usury motive, there still be be some form of usuryfree money and there will be happiness, peace, prosperity and abundance for everyone on this planet. Indeed, “profit” is possible without depending upon usury as the brutal, ruthless, evil and immoral element that creates it. Eventually, the usurers will whither away when we-the-people re-create a world of usuryfree living.
Zeitgeist - Moving Forward focuses on problems associated with the fossil fuel industry, without even mentioning that there is scientific proof that “abiotic oil” is replenishing oil wells that were formerly capped because they were dry of oil. Indeed, scientists are reporting that abiotic oil is being constantly manufactured by natural forces in the earth’s mantle. More information at these websites: http://www.viewzone.com/abioticoilx.html & http://www.questionsquestions.net/docs04/peakoil1.html
Zeitgeist - Moving Forward masters the art of mixing truth and misinformation - which is commonly accidental and disinformation - which is usually purposely spread. As the film documentary points out, it may indeed, be true that violence and addictions are likely less evident in people who have been lucky enough to avoid childhood abuse. Poverty may be defined as a childhood abuse inflicted by the creditors on the parents who are the debtors, but some people have been able to survive poverty and eventually live a usuryfree lifestyle.
It would be a giant step, probably not possible in the near future, to live without money as the film documentary suggests, BUT I daresay that we could live without usury by simply abolishing the usury software and inserting the usuryfree software within the local, national and global banking system which is commonly referred to as the hardware system.
Zeitgeist - Moving Forward is a too-long, documentary that presents an abundance of information and suggests that we need a transition from our failing monetary paradigm (without directly addressing the design flaw of usury) that is on the slippery slope to global depression. On this point I agree.
The suggested, social paradigm - The Venus Project, calls for a Resource-Based Economy. I fail to understand what will be the catalyst to usher in this new age of advanced technology while we are still in this primitive age of usury-based, debt money. Maybe, the idea of a usuryfree time currency for the whole planet would be a good starting point and we the usuryfree creatives have been advocating that since the latter years of the 20th Century.
Just as the Zeitgeist Movement holds its annual “Z-Day” in March each year, so the UsuryFree Community Currency Movement holds its annual UsuryFree Day on November 13th each year - the beginning of UsuryFree Week - November 13th -19th. On UsuryFree Day and during UsuryFree Week, we have local gatherings/meetings to learn about the evils of our usury-based, debt money system and the blessings of the usuryfree community currency movement.
In summary, I agree with some of the content presented in Zeitgeist - Moving Forward, BUT I am curious about Peter Joseph Merola and who is funding his desire to make a difference and why?
Certainly, it was good "infotainment" on a cold January night.
posted by usuryfree @ 11:17 PM
20 Comments:
The ZM Chapters funded all releases. Peter makes ZERO and any money made goes to the independent chapter for their own use. In short- Peter simply allowed others to screening at their own risk for their own income/breakeven screening. Again, he made nothing. He also spent 200k and allows his video for free download and streaming and only charges 5$ for the huge film. So- your review is crap. Also, his last name isn't Merola LOL. This is invented propaganda and you are a sucker
it seems like you have an usury fetish... what does that mean anyway???
Yes Pete is correct. I am hosting a screening of Z3 this week and a group of supporters here paid to rent the theatre ourselves. Neither Peter or the supporters will make any money from the screening. It basically the "open-source software" model of distribution, and its beautiful.
Hi Sir, when I go to your website www.cyberclass.net I get an HTML virus. Why is that?
I would love to know who is paying you. Whatever it is, they are paying you way tooooo much. I would be the first to consider alternative points of view, but your effort is childish to say the least.
Hi usuryfree,
Let me apologize for the above posters, they shouldn't have attacked you personally, that never helps.
Although they are correct in pointing out that each of the >300 screenings around the world are self-organized (alot with no cost) and self-funded (for the theater ones). I also am participating in this effort.
The 60 language subtitles were another example of hard voluntary work, a big thank you to the TZM Linguistic Team around the world.
I can see how a usuryfree currency would be a good step. But can you see how that wouldn't be enough?
As broached in the movie and elsewhere, Inequality is a big source of the ills of today.
And as long as there is a fear of becoming poor, as long as that fear supports the "need" for property,
and as long as there is property there will be Inequality.
I can't wait to see the movie, and thank you for that errr review?
The Zeitgeist Movement is one of the only organizations I am aware of that does more than poke and point at the problems existing in the world today. At least they pose some sort of solution as well. The solutions proposed are just ideas of a system that hypothetically would function better for mankind as a species. Are their a plethora of others that we should be considering? Proposals like eliminating usury do have merit, and shouldn't be dismissed. Would a transition to a Resource Based Economy be easier or harder to attain in a world with or without usury?
Now that I've given you your due which some people won't bother with I'm sure.................
I would like to read a review of the film that actually talks about its content (plot? Storyline? topics covered and how well they were addressed? Was it funny, depressing, intelligently put together? You have little or nothing to say about a film you are supposedly reviewing, other than it's too long, which truthfully doesn't matter to me. Avatar and the LOTR films were was long too. If that was supposed to be a real review of the film I'd rate your review far lower than you apparently rate the film.
It is really amazing to see how many people feel free to criticise. Can you tell me: what is your contribution to world?
Words blow in the wind. Actions stays and make this world a better place.
You are a man of words...
This 'review' is utter crap, but I'm glad to see in the comments that no one took it seriously.
The proposed “solution” for the present monetary, and let’s face it, resource system, presented in this movie, is a downright scary vision of unified world of technocracy, where people seem to be seamlessly ruled by an invisible entity, and where, as it happened many times in history, the individuals are subordinated to living by the rules and ideology developed and imposed for their own “common good” by the governing body.
A unified world is the promised land, a vision and ambition of every dictatorship, where everyone supposedly is “equal”, except someone has to rule and there isn't anyone to keep the ruling person/class in check (as it happened in socialist countries), while the ruling class decides about everything, starting with children’s education (Jacques Fresco, as he indicated in one of his interviews, has a view on how to raise children already), and, as a result, sooner or later, some will be “more equal” than others. It is an “Animal Farm” in making – no rulers, no government, but the pigs eventually will get most of the apples, while everybody else will keep thinking that it is for their own well-being.
This movie proposes just another form of imperialism, which, after all, is an ultimate goal of capitalism, fascism and communism alike, not to mention that there is no word about how we would go from this system to the proposed Utopia, and what happens if not everyone wants to abolish their identity, individuality and creativity, nationality, language, culture, spirituality, their human and democratic rights, and unify the environment around them. No word about who and how would rule such world, no word about the citizen’s involvement in governing; I assume not big, since the movie illustrates in so many details already the proposed plan for the new order.
It will be very interesting to watch the next sequence and where it will lead, although it gives me shivers seeing how many people jumped on the Zeitgeist’ bandwagon without any critical thought, and makes me wonder why no one stops them in so many countries around the world (!), if the proposed system is supposedly in such striking opposition to the present (dis)order?
Or is it?
The difference with this proposed solution, is that there IS NO ruling class, and the decisions are made not based upon someone's opinion, but based on a scientific method, that is - the best possible solution available. I don't think this is hard to comprehend. Is it? That wouldn't be a dictatorship. This idea would actually prevent an upper ruling class. Of course, this could not make everyone equal. No system can, But this one would certainly solve a lot of today's problems
“the decisions are made “ The decisions are made by who?? Who would be the decision-maker according to the Zeitgeist Movement??
Does the human population, including scientists, have the capacity to know the absolute truth? We don’t, do we?
Science can be, and often is, biased and corrupted just like any other human activity. Who will decide which scientific research/method/discovery is necessary and/or useful and which is not? If not the ruling class, and neither the rest of the population through a democratic process, then who? The scientists themselves? What if they are wrong, like they were many times in the past and present? If in this Utopian world everyone gets what they need, based on the previous research and report about their needs, who will decide (and why) which scientific method and research and field research is more valuable (needed) than other? What about researching the unpopular theories, often unpopular among the scientists themselves, which so many times lead to real breakthrough? Who will assure, that those researches are still conducted, if the whole establishment will be satisfied with whatever the status quo? Would there be any progress? Would the progress be allowed? Would asking questions be allowed? Jacques Fresco said in his interview that people should not be allowed their own opinion (which is an alarming statement), and the last time I’ve checked, the scientists were people. Everything, absolutely everything in this new world supposed to be unified, accordingly to someone’s idée fixe. “Getting back to the idée fixe, let me say that it's what produces strong men and madmen.” (- Joaquim Maria Machado de Assis, The Posthumous Memoirs of Brás Cubas (translated by Gregory Rabassa)). Often they are the same.
If this vision of homogenous, supposedly improved, new world, where there is not one word about democracy, on improving the existing system for the people AND by the people, does not ring huge alarm bells in peoples’ minds, than I don’t know what will. Perhaps waking-up one day in the world where everything is decided for you and you are reduced to a mindless, emotionless technical device. But I guess, then would be too late/impossible to wake-up.
In a RBE, decisions aren't 'made' but rather 'arrived at.' Science can be corrupt, sure, but it is the one system in which theories and ideas must be PROVEN before they are taken seriously. ANYONE can challenge any scientific finding and if the findings differ then the theory must be reevaluated. We do not have ABSOLUTE truth and perhaps never will, but through science we can know things to such a high degree of truth that it is nearly impossible to disagree with (who would challenge the theory of relativity?). Scientists have been wrong before and will be again, but science is ever evolving. It doesn't claim to be 'all-knowing', it's just our best explanation for the way things are that we currently have at that time.
Why wouldn't questions be allowed? Why wouldn't progress be allowed? That's the entire point of this proposed system. We are ever-progressing. Your use of the word 'Utopia' causes me to believe that you aren't listening to the ideas with an open mind. No one has ever call the RBE a 'utopia.' There is no PERFECTION. We're just trying to make things better and better and aim to create a system in which continual progress would be more possible. The only progress our current system advocates is through the acquisition of wealth by any means necessary, which is what causes so many of the world's problems.
You take Fresco out of context. Of course we have our opinions, but in certain situations opinions aren't useful. Who cares what my opinion is when it comes to building an airplane? I don't know enough about airplanes in the first place.
A RBE is for the people and certainly BY the people. Who else would create it? No one would decide things for you. More like NOTHING would be decided for you.
This movement, and its’ supporters, talks about the superiority of science while created a movie dishing new theories about religion out of thin air, against all scientific discoveries so far. Something is wrong here.
You are espousing a lot of the common contentions and fallacies that are used to discredit the Zeitgeist Movement. Let it be clear. If you knew anything of Peter outside of this particular film, you would know he acknowledges usury and its detriments. Do your research. Secondly, the profit motive IS the problem. Usury is a problem as well, but the motive for profit has shown a thousand times over its detriments to society -- pollution, waste, poverty (structural violence). Removing usury is not going to change the values of our society or clean up the massive amounts of waste before we end up paying 10 bucks for a bottle of water. Also, your prima facie assertions that the Venus Project is essentially a daydream or a "wonderland" is a joke. It is a logical system and Jacque designed it. It can be built today. Period. Not if we only abolish usury though.
The Zeitgeist Movement, my take by Matt Ziezke:
http://www.facebook.com/notes/matt-zietzke/the-zeitgeist-movement-my-take/10150125626402529
Mathematically Perfected Economy™ *IS* the only "resource" (production) based economy -- and it's the only fact of actual, just, sustainable economy, because it is the *only* integral solution of the categoric faults of conventional, pretended economy (purposed exploitation).
Most of the comments above say that your review is crap, without pointing out why. I think I know why because I know that, in the past (when I was an obsessed teenager), I would attack anyone against the Venus project or Peter Joseph because I had an irrational belief that since "I" agreed with the film, EVERYONE had to.
Your review makes sense since I think you know enough about alternative systems of exchange and property.
I also though about usury as the prime factor of inequality and other social ills.
I have always asked the questions, "what the hell is interest?", "where did it come from" and "who the hell would support usury?". I either have not researched such things yet or have not been able to find an answer.
You're review is fine in my opinion. Thank you for being honest, or at least, as honest as I perceive your review to be.
Hi,
My Name is Doug Smith (no really it is)
I don't know much about anything. Just a regular guy. I have no idea how the complexities of economics work. I do know that I need 1600 dollars this month to pay my mortgage, that I am in debt and that I have money in the stock market. I had an argument with a friend who studies finance. In a simplistic uneducated way I was and am puzzled when I am told that bundling mortgages and selling them is a product or commodity. What can I do with this product/commodity? Can I mow my lawn or watch a movie on it or make music with it? Where is the intrinsic value?
Both the film and the "review" are filled with opinions. (side note, if I had only read the review of the film with the intent of knowing what it was about, I would be clueless, except that it was too long for a documentary. Is there a governing body somewhere that determines what the length a documentary should be? I thought a reviewer recapped the film and then gave an opinion) I’m just sayin.
In my life I employ a basic tenant as often as I can to make decisions. How much is the decision or action influenced by FACT and or OPINION. Although science is influenced by opinion, it is more clearly driven by imagination and ideas which arrive through testing and experimentation at conclusions and findings. These are scrutinized by others and tested before they are accepted as facts. You don’t have to be a scientist to understand that. (by the way I learned about scientific theory in Jr. high school.) Those in power who poo poo science and technology as unimportant probably just got off and airplane, rode in a car and are protected by people with guns and complex communication devices which were all developed with the use of scientific theory, not opinion. It is a scientific fact that due to gravity if I drop a basketball it will bounce and eventually rest close to the earth. Does it touch the earth? I don’t know, but whether it does touch the earth or not doesn’t matter, my opinion of the event as good or bad, valuable or detrimental is irrelevant.
Clearly the information in Zeitgeist applied leading toward the Venus project are dreams. But, at one time so was the idea of traveling in space, flying or submersing ourselves for months at a time in the ocean. All were considered impossible at one time. Whether the Venus project or some other yet unknown alternative society comes into being or not, I personally find it refreshing to see some kind of idea that is an alternative to the morass we find ourselves in now. Bail out a Bank? It is just antithetical to what a bank stands for. Again in my simple blue collar upbringing in the US, I thought banks represented a form of financial security where your money is safe!
In respect to the evolution of the Zeitgeist films, all of which I have found interesting, well made and insightful, I applaud Peter Josephs taming of the message. Less finger pointing at individuals like the Bushes ect…. And more assessment of where we were, where we are now and the possibility of something different.
Lastly, I appreciate the fact the usuryfree took the time to see the film and at least write about it. I haven’t heard the term usury in a long time and am inspired to learn more about it and its positive possibilities in the solution to our current unsettling woes.
Thanks for reading my OPINION
Let the discussion continue.
Considering that no one here has considered or even comprehended the inherent greed and self interest in our species, the overcrowding, the reliance upon food sources that are inappropriate and expend resources that could be better utilized elsewhere (eg: Dairy vs Rice/Corn/Wheat) and our absolutely innate desire to do away with that with which we dis/agree/approve/regard/dain/gusted...ad infinitum. We are only akin to a virus because we leech from our host. Its in our nature. Nature does not change. Better to embrace what is than to waffle intellectually about potential outcomes and ideas that will never capture enough public interest because they buck nature. So, umm...Yeah fuck it.
Post a Comment
<< Home