12345...1020...


The Zeitgeist Movement | Organization for Global Social Change

Calling all Danes, Swedes, Finns, Norwegians, Faroe Islanders, Icelanders, and all who want to assist the TZM chapters in Scandinavia. It is now time to develop a strategy!

The goal is to reunite or get to know new people among the Scandinavian chapters, discuss our weaknesses within chapters, develop a better strategy to make TZM more effective, and to talk about preparations for the coming Zeitgeist European Meet-Up in Sweden next year.

Continued here:

The Zeitgeist Movement | Organization for Global Social Change

The Zeitgeist Movement Australian Chapter

DAY ONE

Zeitgeist Movement supporters started pouring in from chapters all around the world as the doors opened to the very appropriately named New Globe Theatre in Brisbane, Australia, Saturday morning on the last weekend of March.

Organisers scurried excitedly, setting up the various areas, including: the merchandise space; the questions for PJ booth; the vegan food buffet; the bar; the workshop space, scattered with comfy chairs and recommended readings; and of course, the main stage, where presentations would be continuously running over the first two-day Z-Day main event.

Check out this great overview of Z-Day Day One by one of the very talented New Zealand coordinators, Wiri Te Moni.

The volunteer technicians, and chapter coordinators Jason Lord from LA and Michael Kubler from Adelaide, worked tirelessly, making sure we had quality recordings of each presentation for later viewing on the TZMGlobal YouTube Channel. Audience members got comfortably acquainted and seated. (Links to presentation recordings will be added to this post as they are uploaded.)

Photos by Michael Kubler @kublermdk, Renee McKeown, and Jason Lord

As soon as everything was ready to go, Z-Day Global kicked off, starting with my opening presentation, where I spoke about the theme of this years Z-Day: Towards Global Unity and Abundance, as well as advice on creating a sustainable and successful chapter, the amount of work involved in making Z-Day happen, ways to avoid economic bigotry, and concluding with a certain framing of encouraging a unified quest to understand the nature of reality rather than personal ambition to win over your perceived opponents.

Casey Davidson, Australian National Coordinator

This was followed by the very knowledgeable and insightful Franky Mller, National Coordinator of the German chapter. Franky shared TZM Understandings important information about The Zeitgeist Movement, refreshing our minds and filling in important gaps in knowledge for those still learning about the tenets and train-of-thought.

Franky Mller, German National Coordinator

See Frankys presentation here.

After Franky, the second of our presenters, Cameron Reilly entertained the crowd with a tongue-in-cheek questionnaire asking the audience about their own psychopathic tendencies and giving them the opportunity to measure it according to their results. He talked about the specific traits of psychopaths, touching on the idea that people who fit into this personality type are not changeable and will always be born. Additionally, the system we have created actually encourages people with these tendencies to acquire positions of power, hence the title of his presentation, the Psychopath Economy.

Simultaneously, we had set up a workshop space in the adjacent room for Z-Day participants who were more interested in being involved in activities and discussions. The first of these workshops came from Caroline Rentel, author and activist, who shared ideas about a relatively new writing genre, Solarpunk, basically based in a future society beyond scarcity and hierarchy, where humanity, nature and technology are integrated.

Caroline Rentel, Solarpunk author

Caroline and Camerons presentations lead into lunch time, where a selection of delicious vegan foods were provided as part of the Z-Day ticket. Curries, cakes, sushi, burgers and snacks were available for all participants served on eco-friendly plates with serviettes and cutlery. Thanks to the lead food volunteer coordinator, Vicky Syme and everyone else who worked so hard to make food available for everyone. For future Z-Day organisers, I would suggest that having food available at the venue is very important in keeping the audience members together to collaborate and be on time for the presentation straight after lunch.

Vegan chefs Vicki and Margarita

Lunch time!

Our first presentation after lunch came from Rich Penney, who we flew in from Toronto, Canada. Rich has attended several Z-Days as one of the most intruiging and informed presenters within the Movement. This year he shared the very clear Contradictions of Capitalism, in a way that allowed us some insight into Richs life living with disability, as well as intellectual gifts that cant be easily monetised in this society. This is a fantastic introductory presentation to help people understand the core problems of the way we have structured society.

We were next graced with the presence of two of the very talented guys from acclaimed Aussie band, Dead Letter Circus, Kim Benzie and Luke Williams. As I have personally been a long-time fan of DLC with their unique sound, emotionally evoking and incredibly conscious lyrics which fall in line beautifully with the tenets of the Zeitgeist Movement, it was amazingly awe-inspiring to hear Luke and Kim talk about their personal experience and journey as artists against oppression. The uplifting conclusion of their presentation of their song While You Wait, together with lyrics and the comically-titled anti-establishment drum solo moved the audience to a standing ovation.

Luke Williams, Dead Letter Circus Drummer

Kim Benzie, Dead Letter Circus Vocalist, Z-Day 2017

While these presentations were going on, Oliver Koslik from Canada presented interactively in the workshop space on Emotional Suppression: A short course on how to recognise and deal with gas-lighting/ambient abuse.

Oliver Koslik

The fun continued on the main stage as we introduced the next of our international guests, Euvie Ivanova from the Future Thinkers Podcast. As a co-host of the Future Thinkers Podcast, Euvie promotes technology, science and consciousness for social concern.

Here is a quick overview of the premise of the Future Thinkers Podcast.

Euvies presentation was particularly focused on consciousness development, as she spoke pragmatically about ways in which we can explore our consciousness using methods from a variety of doctrines. This was particularly interesting to the audience as something that hasnt been discussed in detail in regards to TZM.

Euvie Ivanova Future Thinkers Z-Day

The other half of the Future Thinkers Podcast, Mike Gilliland, followed Euvies presentation. Mike shared his thoughts on the potential of blockchain technology, beyond the limitations of bitcoin. Topics such as decentralisation, security and developing intelligent management systems were explored.

Mike Gilliland from Future Thinkers at Z-Day 2017

During Euvie and Mikes presentations, the Melbourne chapter coordinators Brad Cini and Sonny Vice sat with an intrigued group in the workshop space as they spoke about their upcoming Zero Waste/Minimalisation project they are in the process of creating, and hopefully recreating in cities outside of Melbourne.

Sonny Vice and Brad Cini from the Melbourne Chapter

Everyone was ready for another break to debrief and snack, before moving into the final presentation of the day from ex-Italian coordinator and futurist author Federico Pistono. Federico presented Ethics of Technology, sharing an alternative look at the worlds state of affairs, suggesting ways in which technology is already shifting humanity forward, and new ethical considerations that need to be taken into account regarding this. He shared some controversial topics for discussion that lead into his concluding statement about exponential empathy.

Federico Pistono at Z-Day 2017 Brisbane Australia

Just before the panel, Gilbert Ismail shared a brief update on the global chapters administration and new website. Mark Enoch shared his method for marketing the RBE message in the workshop space, followed by Matt Peddie and Vera L Te Velte from the CryptoParty who showed audience members ways to make their devices more secure.

After all the presentations, I was fortunate enough to lead the Day One Panel, where audience members had the opportunity to ask the speakers questions from the first days presentations on the main stage. This included a lively discussion where panellists authentically shared their thoughts on activism within TZM, as well as a range of social, economic and environmental concerns and ideas for consideration.

Panel from left:Casey Davidson, Franky Muller, Rich Penney, Luke Williams, Kim Benzie, Euvie Ivanova, Mike Gilliland, Federico Pistono, Gilbert Ismail

Day One Z-Day 2017 Panel At front: Casey Davidson Back from left: Franky Muller, Rich Penny, Luke Williams, Kim Benzie

Z-Day 2017 in Brisbane was the first Global event to have presentations as well as workshops. It was also the first with evening performances. A big thanks to the beautiful Anita Diamond for MCing and organising the evenings performances. Roger Smith shared his spontaneous outbreaks of reason, with his passionate funk/blues/rock sound, bringing urgency to the message of the Zeitgeist Movement. This was followed by other local artists including Aceso and The Duke. The evening was complete with DJ SAMARI, coming in from Auckland, New Zealand who shared his Zeitgeist Anaglyph.

Aceso

DAY TWO

Enthusiastic minds entered the New Globe Theatre for the second and final day of the Z-Day weekend with presentation and Q & A from Zeitgeist Movement founder and Zeitgeist film creator Peter Joseph. For a quick overview of the second day, check out Wiris vlog below.

Californian coordinator Jason Lord, kicked off Day 2 with his presentation, Defining Root Causes a short tour through common surface associations where people fall victim to seeing persistent problems as individual outcomes that need fighting or resisting. Jasons presentation explored how to see these problems as symptoms pointing to a systemic problem and helping people see how the system view can help shape your actions when it comes to activism and discussion with peers.

Jason Lord, California TZM Coordinator

Jason then introduced Peter Joseph, TZM Founder, who started with his concise presentation titled Train of Thought before delving into questions I took from the PJ booth and the audience. Just some of the topics discussed include adapting to natural laws, the victims of our structure particularly our social system, human nature, white imperial self indulgence, biodiversity, how every life support system is in decline, abundance producing mechanism, corporations, techno-capitalist apologists, structural violence, discussion about the Interreflections trailer, managing the Movement and its role in activism, philanthropy and consciousness.

Watch Peters Q & A in the video below.

After Peter, the audience once again enjoyed a delicious vegan lunch, before coming back for the final presentations, which were focused around the fight and the build towards the Zeitgeist Movements ultimate vision of a Resource-Based Economy (RBE). Richard Ostmason of the Money Free Party New Zealand, shared the work he has been doing within the political establishment to engage people into thinking about the potential of actually seeing an RBE in the short-term, particularly in New Zealand.

Richard Ostmason, Money Free Party NZ, presenting at Z-Day 2017

Next, Adelaide coordinator, Michael Kublers presented about the Price of Zero Transition, making a very important point that we cant wait for collapse and then expect to grow the world we want to see out of the ashes (coined the Phoenix Model). Rather, we need to start making systemic changes now in a variety of ways if we truly want to see an RBE.

Michael Kubler presenting at Z-Day 2017

This was followed by Ziggy Tolnay of the Sydney chapter, who shared a concept called the RBE10K project, about creating a physical community in which people could participate in as a transitionary method towards a global RBE.

Ziggy Tolnay presenting at Z-Day 2017

By this stage, the crowd was growing exceedingly weary after two full days of learning and sharing, but were very fortunate to be jolted back to the present with the very talented and insightful Eleanor Goldfield, with her emotionally evoking and painfully accurate spoken word performance about capitalism and activism. This was followed by her presentation, which rounded up the whole two days worth of events as she shared her very honest and authentic thoughts on the importance of the fight and the build that needs to happen as we work towards a post-capitalist society, making clear that capitalism will die, but whether we die with it is up to us.

Eleanor Goldfield performing and presenting at Z-Day 2017 Brisbane Australia

Eleanor Goldfield performing and presenting at Z-Day 2017 Brisbane Australia

Eleanor Goldfield performing and presenting at Z-Day 2017 Brisbane Australia

During the main stage presentations, a generous portion of the audience had made their way into the workshop space to engage with a very interesting and important presentation with one of the most experienced, thoughtful and knowledgeable ethics and systems designers, Richard Mochelle. Richard shared his thoughts on a tangible way to acquire land for a Resource-Based Economy, outside of the current methods of land acquirement, which requires submission to the current economic paradigm. Richard suggested that this land could be acquired through creating an RBE trust, in which baby boomers ultimately give their land to a cause in which promises are made to care for their land and not sell it back to the banks.

Richard Mochelle and Casey Davidson

The audience had another quick break before joining us again for the final panel with Day 2 presenters, including Peter Joseph. A range of topics were once again discussed including UBI, as well as other concerns and questions regarding transition.

Day 2 Panel Z-Day 2017

Id like to put out a big thanks to Vince and JV, who have attended every Z-Day Global since its incarnation, and have worked on the door every year, providing a significant help to coordinators, including myself.

JV and Vince Z-Day 2017 Brisbane Australia

A big thanks also to my wonderful local chapter team who managed the merchandise stand, who helped set up and pack up the venue, who managed the workshop space, and generally made everything run smoothly. Particularly to James Pauly, Karl Hansen and Lara Jordan. Thanks also to the New Globe Theatre for providing the wonderful space.

James Pauly

TZM Merchandise

Thanks also to the lovely vegan activists who spent two full-days at the event sharing their knowledge about the environmental and personal benefits of a direct active change Zeitgeist Movement advocates can make towards ethical consumer choices, including a vegan lifestyle.

Vegan Stall at Z-Day 2017

Thank you also to all of the other people behind the scene who found the power within yourself to volunteer your time and energy and provide assistance without any expectation of personal gain, but purely for the message of TZM. This includes those who lent and donated needed funding, anyone who bought a ticket, anyone who was offered a free ticket due to your circumstances, anyone who asked a question, participated in any way, who offered an idea, a question, who bought merchandise or a drink, who offered their assistance in any way shape or form, or even sat passively as an audience member. Bums on seats count, and matter particularly to organisers, presenters and performers. Thanks also to our global online audience who made a weekend of it by participating in the online streaming from afar.

Paul Doyle from Frequencies TV Life Streaming for ZDay Global Brisbane

Another big thanks to Jason Lord, Michael Kubler and Paul Doyle who made sure the video content including streaming and videos for later viewing would be available to our global audience who couldnt make the big trip to Brisbane. This is a significantly huge job and anyone with technical skills is always encouraged to help in this regard to make sure our content reaches a larger audience and forever into the future.

Jason making sure everything is running smoothly

Michael Kubler, usually behind the camera

Id also like to extend my gratitudeto all of the other people behind the scene who found the power within yourself to volunteer your time and energy and provide assistance without any expectation of personal gain, but purely for the message of TZM.

Z-Day 2017 Group Photo

Z-Day 2017 Setting up for Group Photo

A special mention to Zac Syme for your support as well as opening your home for the presenter social night and providing a home for so many people leading up to, and over the event. Thanks to others who opened their home to travelling guests, including Simon Cole, Caroline and Karl, Ricky, Grant, Anita and Tim, James, Lara and Jack.

Zac Syme, Queensland TZM Coordinator and Federico Pistono, Author, ex-Italian Coordinator Photos by Michael Kubler

Thanks again to Paul Doyle for offering your studio Frequencies TV where we recorded podcasts with coordinators and the Future Thinkers Podcast hosts Mike and Euvie, as well as for the public social night on Friday night before the event. More photos of the Pre-Z-Day Party here.

2017-03-24th Pre ZDay global public event at Frequencies TV, Brisbane Photos by Michael Kubler @kublermdk

Regardless of how far the Movement may or may not have come, we still have significant momentum, and your support however much or little you can give makes a differences to our ability to spread the message. Im eternally grateful for all of the support and truly believe with the mindset of the participants in this years Z-Day we can make the drastic change we need to see to truly create a unified, abundant world.

More photos by Michael Kubler and others here.

Peter Joseph (TZM Founder) and Casey Davidson (TZM Australia Coordinator)Article by Casey Davidson

See original here:

The Zeitgeist Movement Australian Chapter

The Zeitgeist Movement – Wikipedia

The Zeitgeist Movement is an activist movement established in the United States in 2008 by Peter Joseph.The group is critical of market capitalism, describing it as structurally corrupt and wasteful of resources.According to The Daily Telegraph, the group dismisses historic religious concepts as misleading, and embraces sustainable ecology and scientific administration of society.

Read more:

The Zeitgeist Movement - Wikipedia

About | The Zeitgeist Movement

What are some of the central characteristics of the solution proposed?

Automation of Labor

As the trend of what appears to be an exponential increase in the evolution of information technology, robotics, and computerization continues, it is apparent that human labor is becoming more and more inefficient in regard to meeting the demands necessary for supporting the global population. From the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, we have seen an increasing trend toward technological unemployment, which is the phenomenon where humans are replaced by machines in the work force. This trend, while debatable in regard to its ultimate long term effect on employment, creates a propensity to displace the worker and hence the consumer, slowing consumption.

That stated, this issue is actually overshadowed by a larger social imperative: That the use of machine labor (mechanization) is provably more efficient than human performance in virtually all sectors. For example, if one was to track the performance output of factory production within the US steel industry for the past 200 years, we find that not only do less than 5% of the workforce now work in such factories, the efficiency and output capacities have increased substantially. The trend, in fact, now shows that Employment is Inverse to Productivity. The more mechanization occurs, the more productive an industry becomes.

Today, there are repetitive occupations which simply do not need to exist given the state of automation and computerization (cybernation). Not only would mechanization in these areas reduce the mundane burden and allow more free time for people, it also would, more importantly, increase productivity. Machines do not need breaks, vacations, sleep, etc.. The use of mechanization on its own means to create many forms of abundance on this planet, from food to physical goods.

However, to do this, the traditional labor system we have simply cannot exist. The reality is that our labor for income system is stifling progress in its requirement to keep people working for the sake of economic stability. We are reaching a stage where the efficiency of automation is overriding and making obsolete the system of labor for income. This trend shows no sign of slowing, especially in regard to the now dominant Service Industry, which is increasingly being automated in the form of kiosks, robotics, and other forms. Likewise, due to phenomena related to Moores law and the growing in-expense of computers and machines, it is likely that it is simply a matter of time before corporations simply can no longer rationalize keeping human labor anymore, as the automation systems will become too cheap. Of course, this is a paradoxical market phenomenon, called by some theorists as the contradiction of capitalism, for it is, in effect, removing the consumer (laborer) itself and hence reducing consumption.

Apart from those issues, it is important to also consider human labor contributions based on social relevance, not monetary gain. In a RBE, there would be no reason to have occupations such as Banking, Trading, Insurance, Cashiers, Brokers, Advertising or anything related to the governance of money.

All human actions in the form of institutionalized labor should also have the highest social return. There is no logic in wasting resources, time, and energy on operations that do not have a direct and tangible function. This adjustment alone would remove millions of jobs, for the idea of working for money as a purpose would no longer exist.

In turn, all the poor demographic, shoddy goods, vanity items, and culturally contrived creations designed to influence people for reasons of status (for the sole sake of profit) would also no longer exist, saving countless amounts of time and resources.

One final note on this issue: Some hear this and they assume that this voids the Communicative Arts, and personal and social expression as far as painting, sculpture, music, and the like. No. These mediums of expression will likely thrive like never before, for the amount of free time made available to people will permit a renaissance of creativity and invention, along with community and social capital. The elimination of the burden of labor obligation will also reduce stress and create a more amiable culture.

There is a difference between creating for the sake of keeping society sustainable and efficient, focusing on resource preservation, product efficiency, and strategic allocation of labor for those things which generate a tangible social return versus creating for personal expression, exploration, experimentation, and hence art, which has been a staple of human evolution since the dawn of time.

Access over Property

The concept of property, unannounced to most people today, is a fairly new social concept. Before the neolithic revolution, as extrapolated from current hunter and gatherer societies existing today, property relationships did not exist as we know them. Neither did money, or even trade, in many cases. Communities existed in an egalitarian fashion, living within the carrying capacity of their regions and the natural production built in. It was only after direct agricultural development was discovered, eventually proceeding with resource acquisition by ship traders and the like up to modern day power establishments and corporations that property became a highly defined staple of society as we know it today.

With that understood, which dismisses the common notion that property is a result of some kind of empirical human nature, the notion of no property is also today often blindly associated with Communism and the works of Karl Marx. It is important to point out TZMs advocation of no property is derived from logical inference, based almost explicitly upon strategic resource management and efficiency, rather than any surface influence by these supposed Communist ideals. There is no relation between the two, for communism was not derived from the needs to preserve and manage resources efficiently. Communism, in theory and practice, was based on a social/moral relativism which was culturally specific not environmentally specific which is the case with a RBE.

The real issue relevant to meeting human needs is not ownership it is access. People use things; they do not own them. Ownership is a non-operational, protectionist advent, derived from generations of scarcity over resources, currently compounded by market-based advertising which supports status/class division for the sake of monetary gain . To put it another way, ownership is a form of controlled restriction, both physically and ideologically. Property as a system of controlled restriction, coupled with the monetary value inherent, and hence the market consequences, is unsustainable, limiting, and impractical.

In a NL/RBE model, the focus moves from static ownership to strategic access, with a system designed for society to obtain access as needed. For example, rather than owning various forms of recreational sporting equipment, Access Centers are set up, typically in regions where such actions occur, where a person simply checks out the equipment, uses it for as long as they want, and then returns it. This library type arrangement can be applied to virtually any type of human need. Of course, those reading this who have been conditioned into a more individualistic, materialistic mindset often objects with claims such as What if I want green, custom golf clubs, but only white are available?. This is a culturally contrived, biased reservation. The issue in question is utility, not vanity. Human expression has been molded by the needs of the current market based system (consumption) into values which are simply nonfunctional and irrelevant. Yes, this would require a value adjustment to quality rather than identity. The fact is, even for those who object from the standpoint of their interest in personal identity, the overarching social ramifications of such an social approach will create benefits that will greatly overshadow any such arbitrary personal preference, creating new values to replace the outdated ones.

These include : (a) No Property Crime: In a world of access rather than ownership, and without money, there is no incentive to steal, for there is no resale value. You can not steal something that no one owns and you certainly couldnt sell it. (b) Access Abundance: It has been denoted that the average automobile sits in parking spaces for the majority of its life span, wasting space and time. Rather than having this wasteful consequence of the ownership system, one car could facilitate a large number of users in a given region, with only a fraction of the production/resources needed. [c) Peak Efficiency of Production: Unlike today, where the market system must perpetuate inherently inferior products for the sake of economic turnover, we could actually design goods to last, using the best materials and processes strategically available. We no longer make cheap products to serve a poor demographic (which is the majority). This attribute alone will save cataclysmic amounts of resources, while also enabling a society to have access to goods and services that they would never have had in a world based on money, inherent obsolescence, and property.

Self-Contained/Localized City and Production Systems

There are many brilliant engineers who have worked to tackle the issue of industrial design; from Jacque Fresco, to R. Buckminster Fuller, to Nicola Tesla. Behind such designs, such as Jacque Frescos famed Circular Cities or Fullers Geodesic Domes, rests a basic train of thought: Strategic Efficiency and Maximization of Productivity.

For example, Frescos circular city is constructed of a series of belts, each serving a social function such a energy production, research, recreation, living, etc.. Each city is a hence a system, where all needs are produced within the city complex, in a localized fashion, whenever possible. For example, renewable energy generation occurs near the outer perimeter. Food production is produced closer to the middle within industrial-sized greenhouses.

This is very different in its logic from the globalization-based economy we live in today, which wastes outrageous amounts of energy and resources due to unneeded transport and labor processing. Likewise, transportation within the circular cities is strategically created to eliminate the use of detached automobiles, except for rare cases such as emergency vehicles. Homes are created to be micro-systems as well, with much power generation occurring internally, such as from sunlight absorbed by the building structure using photovoltaic technology. More information on these city system can be found at https://www.thevenusproject.com.

The Geodesic Dome, perfected by Buckminster Fuller, offers another efficiency oriented medium within a similar train of thought. Fullers goal was to build designs to do more with fewer resources. He noticed problems inherent in conventional construction techniques, and recognized the indigenous strength of naturally occurring structures. The advantages include: a much stronger structure than a conventional building while using less material to construct; domes can be built very quickly because they are of a modular prefab construction and suit being mass produced; They also use less energy to keep warm/cool than a conventional box structure. More information can be found at http://www.bfi.org/

In the end, the fundamental interest is, again, sustainability and efficiency on all levels, from the housing design to the earth design. The market system actually fights this efficiency due to the broken, competitive nature inherent.

Technological Unification of Earth via Systems Approach

We live in a symbiotic/synergistic planetary ecosystem, with a cause-effect balance reflecting a single system of earthy operation. Buckminster Fuller defined this well when he referred to the planet as Spaceship Earth. It is time we reflect this natural state of affairs in our societal affairs on this planet. The fact of the matter is that human societies, which are dispersed across the globe, require resources which are also un-uniformly dispersed across the globe. Our current procedure for enabling resource distribution comes in the form of corporations which seek and claim ownership of our earthly resources, which they in turn sell to others in the name of profit. The problems inherent in this practice are numerous, again due to the self-interest based disposition inherent in selling anything for personal gain, as denoted above. But in the larger scheme of things, this is only partially the issue when it come to the reality that we live on a finite planet, and where resource management and preservation should be the number one concern in regard to human survival, especially with the population explosion of the last 200 years.

Two people are born every second on this planet, and each one of those humans needs a lifetime of food, energy, water and the like. Given this fundamental need to understand what we have, the rates of depletion and, invariably, the need to streamline industry in the most efficient, productive way, a Global System of Resource Management must be put in place. It is just common sense. This is an extensive subject when one considers the technical, quantitative variables needed for implementation. However, for the sake of overview, it can be stated that the first step is a Full Global Survey of all earthly resources. Then, based on a quantitative analysis of the properties of each material, a strategically defined process of production is constructed from the bottom up, using such variables as negative retroactions, renewability, etc. (More on this can be found in the section called Project Earth in the ZM lecture called Where Are We Going?). Then consumption statistics are accessed, rates of depletion become monitored, distribution is logically formulated, etc.. In other words, it is a full Systems Approach to earthly resource management, production, and distribution, with the goal of absolute efficiency, conservation, and sustainability. Given the mathematically defined attributes, as based on all available information at the time, along with the state of technology at the time, the parameters for social operation within the industrial complex become self-evident, with decisions arrived at by way of computation, not human opinion. This is where computer intelligence becomes an important tool for social governance, for only the computation ability/programming of computers can access and strategically regulate such processes efficiently, and in real time. This technological application is not novel. It is simply scaled out from current methods already known.

The Scientific Method as the Methodology for Governance

The application of the scientific method for social concern is an oft-repeated mantra for the basis of social operation in a RBE model. While the obviousness of this in regard to industry is simple enough to understand, it is important to also realize its value in regard to human behavior. Science, historically speaking, has often been derailed as a cold, restrictive discipline, reserved for the sake of mere technology and invention. Little regard seems to be currently given to its use in the understanding of human behavior.

Superstitious thought, which has been powerfully dominant in human evolution, has worked on the basis that the human being was somehow detached from the physical world. We have souls; spirits; we are divine; we are related/guided by an all seeing, all knowing, controlling god, etc..

Conversely, yet oddly similar, there is an argument that humans have free will in their decisions and that we have the open ability to choose our actions, absent of the influence of our environment or even education. Now, while the vastness of the prior two statements and many reading those could find numerous cultural arguments to claim the contrary, this doesnt change the basic reality that we humans have historically liked to think that we are special and unique from the rest of the organisms and natural phenomena around us.

However, as time has gone on, it has become increasingly obvious that we are not special and that there is no such thing as special in the natural worldfor everything is special based on the uniqueness of all organisms. There is no reason to assume the human being is any more important or intrinsically different or special than a mole, a tree, an ant, a leaf or a cancer cell. This isnt New Age rhetoric it is fundamental logic. We are physical phenomena nothing more or less.

We are greatly influenced by our culture and our values and behaviors can only mostly be a result of our conditioning, as external phenomena interacts with our genetic predispositions. For example, we have a notion called talent, which is another word for a genetic predisposition to a given behavior, or set of behaviors. A piano prodigy might have an inherent ability that enables them to learn more quickly and perform in a more acute way than another, who has spent the same time in practice, but doesnt have the genetic predisposition. Be that as it may, that talented person still had to learn what a piano was and how to play it. In other words, genes are not autonomous initiators of commands. It takes an environmental trigger to allow for the propensity to materialize.

At any rate, it is not the point of this article to expand on the argument of nature and nurture. The point is that we have proven to be scientifically defined and a product of a traceable causality and it is this understanding that can allow us to slow and even stop the aberrant, or criminal behavior we see in society today such a abuse, murder, theft and the like. The logic, once the effects of human conditioning are understood, is to remove the environmental attributes which are enabling the reactions.

Just as an abused dog who has been starved for a week might have a knee jerk reaction to react very violently to an otherwise innocuous passerby, we humans have the same behavior dynamic. If you dont want people to steal food, do not deprive them of it. It has been found that prisons are now generating more violence than they are curbing. If you teach a child to be a hateful racist, then he will carry those values into the rest his life, very often. Human values and hence human behavior are shaped by the environment in a cause and effect based way, no different than a leaf being blown by the wind.

In a RBEM, the central focus in regard to removing aberrant human actions is not to punish them, but to find the reasons for their offensive actions and work to eliminate them. Humans are products of their environment and personal/social reform is a scientific process.

Moving away from money and markets

Market theory assumes a number of things which have proven to either be false, marginally beneficial, or outright socially detrimental.

The core problems to consider are the following:

A) The need for Infinite Growth, which is mathematically unsustainable and ecologically detrimental. The entire basis of the Market System is not the intelligent management of our mostly finite resources on this planet, but rather the perpetual extraction and consumption of them for the sake of profit and economic growth. In order to keep people employed, people must constantly consume, regardless of the state of affairs within the environment, and often regardless of product utility. This is the absolute reverse of what a sustainable practice would require, which is the strategic preservation and efficient use of resources.

B) A Corruption Generating Incentive System. It is often said that the competitive marketplace creates the incentive to act for the sake of social progress. While this is partially true, it also generates an equal if not more pronounced amount of corruption in the form of planned obsolescence, common crime, wars, large scale financial fraud, labor exploitation, and many other issues. The vast majority of people in prison today are there because of monetary-related crime or non-violent drug offenses. The majority of legislation exists in the context of monetary-based crimes.

Also, if one was to critically examine history and peer into the documented biographies/mentalities of the greatest scientists and inventors of our time, such a N. Tesla, A. Einstein, A. Bell, the Wright Brothers, and many others it is found that they did not find their motivation in the prospect of monetary gain. The interest to make money must not be confused with the interest to create socially beneficial products and very often they are even at odds.

C) A disjunct, inefficient industrial complex which wastes tremendous amount of resources and energy. In the world today, with the advent of Globalization, it has become more profitable to import and export both labor and goods across the globe rather than to produce locally. We import bananas from Ecuador to the US and bottled water from Fuji Japan, while western companies will go to the deprived 3rd world to exploit cheap labor, etc.. Likewise, the process of extraction, to component generation, to assembly, to distribution of a given good might cross through multiple countries for a single final product, simply due to labor and production costs / property costs. This cost efficiency generates extreme technical inefficiency and is only justifiable within the market system for the sake of saving money.

In a RBE model, the focus is maximum technical efficiency. The production process is not dispersed, but made as centralized and fluid as possible, with elements moving the very least amount, saving what would be tremendous amounts of energy and labor as compared to methods today. Food is grown locally whenever possible (which is most of the time given the flexibility of indoor agriculture technology today), while all extraction, production and distribution is logically organized to use as little labor/transport/space as possible while producing the strategically best possible goods (see more below). In other words, the system is planned to maximize efficiently and minimize waste.

D) A propensity for Establishments. Very simply, established corporate/financial orders have a built-in tendency to stop new, socially positive advents from coming to fruition if there is a foreshadowed loss of market share, profit, and hence power. It is important to consider the basic nature of a corporation and its inherent need for self-perpetuation.

If a person starts a company, hires employees, creates a market and becomes profitable, what has thus been created, in part, is the means for survival for a group of people. Since each person in that group typically becomes dependent on that organization for income, a natural, protectionist propensity is created whereas anything that threatens the institution thus threatens the well-being of the group/individual. This is the fabric of a competition mindset. While people think of free market competition as a battle between two or more companies in a given industry, they often miss the other level the competition against new advents which would make them obsolete, outright.

The best way to expand on this point is to simply give an example, such as the US Government and Big Oil collusion to limit the expansion of the fully Electric Car (EV) in the US. This issue was well-presented and sourced in the documentary called Who Killed the Electric Car?. The bottom line here is that the need to preserve an established order for the sake of the well-being of those on the payroll, leads to an inherent tendency to stifle progress. A new technology which can make a prior technology obsolete will be met with resistance unless there is a way for the market system to absorb it in a slow fashion, allowing for a transition for the corporations (i.e. the perpetuation of Hybrid cars in the US, as opposed to the fully electric ones which could exist now, in abundance). There is also a large amount of evidence that the FDA has engaged in favoritism/collusion with pharmaceutical companies to limit/stop the availability of advanced progressive drugs which would void existing/profitable ones.

In a RBE, there is nothing to hold back developmental/implementation of anything. If safe and useful, it would immediately be implemented into society, with no monetary institution to thwart the change due to their self-preserving, monetary nature.

E) An inherent obsolescence which creates inferior products immediately due to the need to stay competitive This little recognized attribute of production is another example of the waste which is created in the market system. It is bad enough that multiple companies constantly duplicate each others items in an attempt to make their variations more interesting for the sake of public consumption, but a more wasteful reality is that, due to the competitive basis of the system, it is a mathematical certainty that every good produced is immediately inferior the moment it is created, due the need to cut the initial cost basis of production and hence stay competitive against another company which is doing the same thing for the same reason. The old free market adage where producers create the best possible goods at the lowest possible prices is a needlessly wasteful fantasy and detrimentally misleading, for it is impossible for a company to use the most efficient material or processes in the production of anything, as it would be too expensive to maintain a competitive cost basis.

They very simply cannot make the strategically best physically it is mathematically impossible. If they did, no one would buy it, for it would be unaffordable due the values inherent in the higher quality materials and methods. Remember people buy what they can afford to. Every person on this planet has a built in limit of affordability in the monetary system, so it generates a feedback loop of constant waste via inferior production, to meet inferior demand. In a RBEM, goods are created to last, with the expansion and updating of certain goods built directly into the design, and with recycling strategically accessed as well, limiting waste.

You will notice the term strategically best was used in a statement above. This qualification means that goods are created with respect to the state of affairs of planetary resources, with the quality of materials used based on an equation taking into account all relevant attributes, rates of depletion, negative retroactions, and the like. In other words, we would not blindly use titanium for, say, every single computer enclosure made, just because it might be the strongest materials for the job. That narrow practice could lead to depletion. Rather, there would be a gradient of material quality which would be accessed through analysis of relevant attributes such as comparable resources, rates of natural obsolescence for a given item, statistical usage in the community, etc. These properties and relationships could be assessed through programming, with the most strategically viable solution computed and output in real-time. It is mere issue of calculation.

F) A propensity for monopoly and cartel due to the basic motivation of growth and increased market share. This is a point that economic theorists will often deny under the assumption that open competition is self-regulating and that monopolies and cartels are extremely rare anomalies in a free-market system. This invisible hand assumption holds little validity, historically, not to mention the outstanding legislation around the issue which proves its infeasibility. In America, there have been numerous monopolies, such as Standard Oil and Microsoft. Cartels, which are essentially Monopolies by way of collusion between the largest competitors in an industry, are also persistent to this day, although perhaps less obvious to the casual observer. In any case, the free market itself does not resolve these issues it always takes the government to step in and break up the monopolies.

This aside, the more important point is that in an economy based on growth, it is only natural for a corporation to want to expand and hence dominate. After all, that is the basis of economic stability in the modern world expansion. Expansion of any corporation always gravitates toward monopoly or cartel, for, again, the basic drive of competition is to out-do your competitor. In other words, monopoly and cartel are absolutely natural in the competitive system. In fact, it is inevitable, for again, the very basis is to seek dominance over market share. The true detriment of this reality goes back to the point above the inherent propensity of an Establishment to preserve its institution. If a medical cartel is influencing the FDA, then new ideas which void that cartels income sources will often be fought, regardless of the social benefits being thwarted.

G) The market system is driven, in part, by Scarcity. The less there is of something, the more money that can be generated in the short term. This sets up a propensity for corporations to limit availability, and hence deny production abundance. It is simply against the very nature of what drives demand to create abundance. The Kimberly Diamond Mines in Africa have been documented in the past to burn diamonds in order to keep prices high. Diamonds are rare resources which take billions of years to be created. This is nothing but problematic. The world we live in should be based on the interest to generate an abundance for the worlds people, along with strategic preservation and streamlined methods to enable that abundance. This is a central reason why, as of 2010, there are over a billion people starving on the planet. It has nothing to do with an inability to produce food, and everything having to do with an inherent need to create/preserve scarcity for the sake of short term profits.

Abundance, Efficiency and Sustainability are, very simply, the enemies of profit. This scarcity logic also applies to the quality of goods. The idea of creating something that could last, say, a lifetime with little repair, is anathema to the market system, for it reduces consumption rates, which slows growth and creates systemic repercussions (loss of jobs, etc.). The scarcity attribute of the market system is nothing but detrimental for these reasons, not to mention that it doesnt even serve the role of efficient resource preservation, which is often claimed.

While supply and demand dictates that the less there is of something, the more it will be valued and hence the increased value will limit consumption, reducing the possibility of running out, the incentive to create scarcity, coupled with the inherent short term reward which results from scarcity driven based prices, nullifies the idea that this enables strategic preservation. We will likely never run out of oil in the current market system. Rather, the prices will become so high that no one can afford it, while those corporations who own the remaining oil will make a great deal of money off of the scarcity, regardless of the long term social ramifications. In other words, remaining scarce resources, existing in such high economic value that it limits their consumption, is not to be confused with preservation that is functional and strategic. True strategic preservation can only come from the direct management of the resource in question in regard to the most efficient technical applications of the resource in industry itself, not arbitrary, surface price relationships, absent of rational allocation.

Link:

About | The Zeitgeist Movement

The Zeitgeist Movement Australian Chapter

DAY ONE

Zeitgeist Movement supporters started pouring in from chapters all around the world as the doors opened to the very appropriately named New Globe Theatre in Brisbane, Australia, Saturday morning on the last weekend of March.

Organisers scurried excitedly, setting up the various areas, including: the merchandise space; the questions for PJ booth; the vegan food buffet; the bar; the workshop space, scattered with comfy chairs and recommended readings; and of course, the main stage, where presentations would be continuously running over the first two-day Z-Day main event.

Check out this great overview of Z-Day Day One by one of the very talented New Zealand coordinators, Wiri Te Moni.

The volunteer technicians, and chapter coordinators Jason Lord from LA and Michael Kubler from Adelaide, worked tirelessly, making sure we had quality recordings of each presentation for later viewing on the TZMGlobal YouTube Channel. Audience members got comfortably acquainted and seated. (Links to presentation recordings will be added to this post as they are uploaded.)

Photos by Michael Kubler @kublermdk, Renee McKeown, and Jason Lord

As soon as everything was ready to go, Z-Day Global kicked off, starting with my opening presentation, where I spoke about the theme of this years Z-Day: Towards Global Unity and Abundance, as well as advice on creating a sustainable and successful chapter, the amount of work involved in making Z-Day happen, ways to avoid economic bigotry, and concluding with a certain framing of encouraging a unified quest to understand the nature of reality rather than personal ambition to win over your perceived opponents.

Casey Davidson, Australian National Coordinator

This was followed by the very knowledgeable and insightful Franky Mller, National Coordinator of the German chapter. Franky shared TZM Understandings important information about The Zeitgeist Movement, refreshing our minds and filling in important gaps in knowledge for those still learning about the tenets and train-of-thought.

Franky Mller, German National Coordinator

See Frankys presentation here.

After Franky, the second of our presenters, Cameron Reilly entertained the crowd with a tongue-in-cheek questionnaire asking the audience about their own psychopathic tendencies and giving them the opportunity to measure it according to their results. He talked about the specific traits of psychopaths, touching on the idea that people who fit into this personality type are not changeable and will always be born. Additionally, the system we have created actually encourages people with these tendencies to acquire positions of power, hence the title of his presentation, the Psychopath Economy.

Simultaneously, we had set up a workshop space in the adjacent room for Z-Day participants who were more interested in being involved in activities and discussions. The first of these workshops came from Caroline Rentel, author and activist, who shared ideas about a relatively new writing genre, Solarpunk, basically based in a future society beyond scarcity and hierarchy, where humanity, nature and technology are integrated.

Caroline Rentel, Solarpunk author

Caroline and Camerons presentations lead into lunch time, where a selection of delicious vegan foods were provided as part of the Z-Day ticket. Curries, cakes, sushi, burgers and snacks were available for all participants served on eco-friendly plates with serviettes and cutlery. Thanks to the lead food volunteer coordinator, Vicky Syme and everyone else who worked so hard to make food available for everyone. For future Z-Day organisers, I would suggest that having food available at the venue is very important in keeping the audience members together to collaborate and be on time for the presentation straight after lunch.

Vegan chefs Vicki and Margarita

Lunch time!

Our first presentation after lunch came from Rich Penney, who we flew in from Toronto, Canada. Rich has attended several Z-Days as one of the most intruiging and informed presenters within the Movement. This year he shared the very clear Contradictions of Capitalism, in a way that allowed us some insight into Richs life living with disability, as well as intellectual gifts that cant be easily monetised in this society. This is a fantastic introductory presentation to help people understand the core problems of the way we have structured society.

We were next graced with the presence of two of the very talented guys from acclaimed Aussie band, Dead Letter Circus, Kim Benzie and Luke Williams. As I have personally been a long-time fan of DLC with their unique sound, emotionally evoking and incredibly conscious lyrics which fall in line beautifully with the tenets of the Zeitgeist Movement, it was amazingly awe-inspiring to hear Luke and Kim talk about their personal experience and journey as artists against oppression. The uplifting conclusion of their presentation of their song While You Wait, together with lyrics and the comically-titled anti-establishment drum solo moved the audience to a standing ovation.

Luke Williams, Dead Letter Circus Drummer

Kim Benzie, Dead Letter Circus Vocalist, Z-Day 2017

While these presentations were going on, Oliver Koslik from Canada presented interactively in the workshop space on Emotional Suppression: A short course on how to recognise and deal with gas-lighting/ambient abuse.

Oliver Koslik

The fun continued on the main stage as we introduced the next of our international guests, Euvie Ivanova from the Future Thinkers Podcast. As a co-host of the Future Thinkers Podcast, Euvie promotes technology, science and consciousness for social concern.

Here is a quick overview of the premise of the Future Thinkers Podcast.

Euvies presentation was particularly focused on consciousness development, as she spoke pragmatically about ways in which we can explore our consciousness using methods from a variety of doctrines. This was particularly interesting to the audience as something that hasnt been discussed in detail in regards to TZM.

Euvie Ivanova Future Thinkers Z-Day

The other half of the Future Thinkers Podcast, Mike Gilliland, followed Euvies presentation. Mike shared his thoughts on the potential of blockchain technology, beyond the limitations of bitcoin. Topics such as decentralisation, security and developing intelligent management systems were explored.

Mike Gilliland from Future Thinkers at Z-Day 2017

During Euvie and Mikes presentations, the Melbourne chapter coordinators Brad Cini and Sonny Vice sat with an intrigued group in the workshop space as they spoke about their upcoming Zero Waste/Minimalisation project they are in the process of creating, and hopefully recreating in cities outside of Melbourne.

Sonny Vice and Brad Cini from the Melbourne Chapter

Everyone was ready for another break to debrief and snack, before moving into the final presentation of the day from ex-Italian coordinator and futurist author Federico Pistono. Federico presented Ethics of Technology, sharing an alternative look at the worlds state of affairs, suggesting ways in which technology is already shifting humanity forward, and new ethical considerations that need to be taken into account regarding this. He shared some controversial topics for discussion that lead into his concluding statement about exponential empathy.

Federico Pistono at Z-Day 2017 Brisbane Australia

Just before the panel, Gilbert Ismail shared a brief update on the global chapters administration and new website. Mark Enoch shared his method for marketing the RBE message in the workshop space, followed by Matt Peddie and Vera L Te Velte from the CryptoParty who showed audience members ways to make their devices more secure.

After all the presentations, I was fortunate enough to lead the Day One Panel, where audience members had the opportunity to ask the speakers questions from the first days presentations on the main stage. This included a lively discussion where panellists authentically shared their thoughts on activism within TZM, as well as a range of social, economic and environmental concerns and ideas for consideration.

Panel from left:Casey Davidson, Franky Muller, Rich Penney, Luke Williams, Kim Benzie, Euvie Ivanova, Mike Gilliland, Federico Pistono, Gilbert Ismail

Day One Z-Day 2017 Panel At front: Casey Davidson Back from left: Franky Muller, Rich Penny, Luke Williams, Kim Benzie

Z-Day 2017 in Brisbane was the first Global event to have presentations as well as workshops. It was also the first with evening performances. A big thanks to the beautiful Anita Diamond for MCing and organising the evenings performances. Roger Smith shared his spontaneous outbreaks of reason, with his passionate funk/blues/rock sound, bringing urgency to the message of the Zeitgeist Movement. This was followed by other local artists including Aceso and The Duke. The evening was complete with DJ SAMARI, coming in from Auckland, New Zealand who shared his Zeitgeist Anaglyph.

Aceso

DAY TWO

Enthusiastic minds entered the New Globe Theatre for the second and final day of the Z-Day weekend with presentation and Q & A from Zeitgeist Movement founder and Zeitgeist film creator Peter Joseph. For a quick overview of the second day, check out Wiris vlog below.

Californian coordinator Jason Lord, kicked off Day 2 with his presentation, Defining Root Causes a short tour through common surface associations where people fall victim to seeing persistent problems as individual outcomes that need fighting or resisting. Jasons presentation explored how to see these problems as symptoms pointing to a systemic problem and helping people see how the system view can help shape your actions when it comes to activism and discussion with peers.

Jason Lord, California TZM Coordinator

Jason then introduced Peter Joseph, TZM Founder, who started with his concise presentation titled Train of Thought before delving into questions I took from the PJ booth and the audience. Just some of the topics discussed include adapting to natural laws, the victims of our structure particularly our social system, human nature, white imperial self indulgence, biodiversity, how every life support system is in decline, abundance producing mechanism, corporations, techno-capitalist apologists, structural violence, discussion about the Interreflections trailer, managing the Movement and its role in activism, philanthropy and consciousness.

Watch Peters Q & A in the video below.

After Peter, the audience once again enjoyed a delicious vegan lunch, before coming back for the final presentations, which were focused around the fight and the build towards the Zeitgeist Movements ultimate vision of a Resource-Based Economy (RBE). Richard Ostmason of the Money Free Party New Zealand, shared the work he has been doing within the political establishment to engage people into thinking about the potential of actually seeing an RBE in the short-term, particularly in New Zealand.

Richard Ostmason, Money Free Party NZ, presenting at Z-Day 2017

Next, Adelaide coordinator, Michael Kublers presented about the Price of Zero Transition, making a very important point that we cant wait for collapse and then expect to grow the world we want to see out of the ashes (coined the Phoenix Model). Rather, we need to start making systemic changes now in a variety of ways if we truly want to see an RBE.

Michael Kubler presenting at Z-Day 2017

This was followed by Ziggy Tolnay of the Sydney chapter, who shared a concept called the RBE10K project, about creating a physical community in which people could participate in as a transitionary method towards a global RBE.

Ziggy Tolnay presenting at Z-Day 2017

By this stage, the crowd was growing exceedingly weary after two full days of learning and sharing, but were very fortunate to be jolted back to the present with the very talented and insightful Eleanor Goldfield, with her emotionally evoking and painfully accurate spoken word performance about capitalism and activism. This was followed by her presentation, which rounded up the whole two days worth of events as she shared her very honest and authentic thoughts on the importance of the fight and the build that needs to happen as we work towards a post-capitalist society, making clear that capitalism will die, but whether we die with it is up to us.

Eleanor Goldfield performing and presenting at Z-Day 2017 Brisbane Australia

Eleanor Goldfield performing and presenting at Z-Day 2017 Brisbane Australia

Eleanor Goldfield performing and presenting at Z-Day 2017 Brisbane Australia

During the main stage presentations, a generous portion of the audience had made their way into the workshop space to engage with a very interesting and important presentation with one of the most experienced, thoughtful and knowledgeable ethics and systems designers, Richard Mochelle. Richard shared his thoughts on a tangible way to acquire land for a Resource-Based Economy, outside of the current methods of land acquirement, which requires submission to the current economic paradigm. Richard suggested that this land could be acquired through creating an RBE trust, in which baby boomers ultimately give their land to a cause in which promises are made to care for their land and not sell it back to the banks.

Richard Mochelle and Casey Davidson

The audience had another quick break before joining us again for the final panel with Day 2 presenters, including Peter Joseph. A range of topics were once again discussed including UBI, as well as other concerns and questions regarding transition.

Day 2 Panel Z-Day 2017

Id like to put out a big thanks to Vince and JV, who have attended every Z-Day Global since its incarnation, and have worked on the door every year, providing a significant help to coordinators, including myself.

JV and Vince Z-Day 2017 Brisbane Australia

A big thanks also to my wonderful local chapter team who managed the merchandise stand, who helped set up and pack up the venue, who managed the workshop space, and generally made everything run smoothly. Particularly to James Pauly, Karl Hansen and Lara Jordan. Thanks also to the New Globe Theatre for providing the wonderful space.

James Pauly

TZM Merchandise

Thanks also to the lovely vegan activists who spent two full-days at the event sharing their knowledge about the environmental and personal benefits of a direct active change Zeitgeist Movement advocates can make towards ethical consumer choices, including a vegan lifestyle.

Vegan Stall at Z-Day 2017

Thank you also to all of the other people behind the scene who found the power within yourself to volunteer your time and energy and provide assistance without any expectation of personal gain, but purely for the message of TZM. This includes those who lent and donated needed funding, anyone who bought a ticket, anyone who was offered a free ticket due to your circumstances, anyone who asked a question, participated in any way, who offered an idea, a question, who bought merchandise or a drink, who offered their assistance in any way shape or form, or even sat passively as an audience member. Bums on seats count, and matter particularly to organisers, presenters and performers. Thanks also to our global online audience who made a weekend of it by participating in the online streaming from afar.

Paul Doyle from Frequencies TV Life Streaming for ZDay Global Brisbane

Another big thanks to Jason Lord, Michael Kubler and Paul Doyle who made sure the video content including streaming and videos for later viewing would be available to our global audience who couldnt make the big trip to Brisbane. This is a significantly huge job and anyone with technical skills is always encouraged to help in this regard to make sure our content reaches a larger audience and forever into the future.

Jason making sure everything is running smoothly

Michael Kubler, usually behind the camera

Id also like to extend my gratitudeto all of the other people behind the scene who found the power within yourself to volunteer your time and energy and provide assistance without any expectation of personal gain, but purely for the message of TZM.

Z-Day 2017 Group Photo

Z-Day 2017 Setting up for Group Photo

A special mention to Zac Syme for your support as well as opening your home for the presenter social night and providing a home for so many people leading up to, and over the event. Thanks to others who opened their home to travelling guests, including Simon Cole, Caroline and Karl, Ricky, Grant, Anita and Tim, James, Lara and Jack.

Zac Syme, Queensland TZM Coordinator and Federico Pistono, Author, ex-Italian Coordinator Photos by Michael Kubler

Thanks again to Paul Doyle for offering your studio Frequencies TV where we recorded podcasts with coordinators and the Future Thinkers Podcast hosts Mike and Euvie, as well as for the public social night on Friday night before the event. More photos of the Pre-Z-Day Party here.

2017-03-24th Pre ZDay global public event at Frequencies TV, Brisbane Photos by Michael Kubler @kublermdk

Regardless of how far the Movement may or may not have come, we still have significant momentum, and your support however much or little you can give makes a differences to our ability to spread the message. Im eternally grateful for all of the support and truly believe with the mindset of the participants in this years Z-Day we can make the drastic change we need to see to truly create a unified, abundant world.

More photos by Michael Kubler and others here.

Peter Joseph (TZM Founder) and Casey Davidson (TZM Australia Coordinator)Article by Casey Davidson

More here:

The Zeitgeist Movement Australian Chapter

The Zeitgeist Movement – Wikipedia

Movement that emerged from the Zeitgeist movie series

The Zeitgeist Movement is an activist movement established in the United States in 2008 by Peter Joseph. The group is critical of market capitalism, describing it as structurally corrupt and wasteful of resources. According to The Daily Telegraph, the group dismisses historic religious concepts as misleading, and embraces sustainable ecology and scientific administration of society.[1][2][3][4] VC Reporter's Shane Cohn summarized the movement's charter as: "Our greatest social problems are the direct results of our economic system".[5]

An article in the Journal of Contemporary Religion describes the movement as an example of a "conspirituality", a synthesis of New Age spirituality and conspiracy theory.[6]

Michelle Goldberg of Tablet Magazine called the movement "the world's first Internet-based apocalyptic cult, with members who parrot the party line with cheerful, rote fidelity."[7] In her opinion, the movement is "devoted to a kind of sci-fi planetary communism", and the 2007 documentary that "sparked" the movement was "steeped in far-right, isolationist, and covertly anti-Semitic conspiracy theories."[7]

Alan Feuer of The New York Times said the movement was like "a utopian presentation of a money-free and computer-driven vision of the future, a wholesale reimagination of civilization, as if Karl Marx and Carl Sagan had hired John Lennon from his "Imagine" days to do no less than redesign the underlying structures of planetary life."[8]

The Zeitgeist Movement was formed in 2008 by Joseph shortly after the late 2008 release of Zeitgeist: Addendum, the second film in the Zeitgeist film series.[9][10]

Zeitgeist was first linked to the Venus Project. In April 2011, partnership between the two groups ended in an apparent power struggle, with Joseph commenting, "Without [the Zeitgeist Movement], [the Venus Project] doesnt exist it has nothing but ideas and has no viable method to bring it to light."[9]

The first Zeitgeist documentary which predates the organization Zeitgeist movement, borrowed from the works of Eustace Mullins, Lyndon LaRouche, and radio host Alex Jones.[7] Much of its footage was taken directly from Alex Jones documentaries.[7]

The group holds an annual event, Z-Day (or Zeitgeist Day), an "educational forum" held in March. The New York Times reported on the second Z-Day held at Manhattan Community College in New York in 2009 which included lectures by Peter Joseph and Jacque Fresco.[8] This event sold out with 900 people paying $10 each to attend. The event's organizers said that 450 connected events in 70 countries around the globe also took place.[8]

Read more:

The Zeitgeist Movement - Wikipedia

The Zeitgeist Movement | Organization for Global Social Change

Calling all Danes, Swedes, Finns, Norwegians, Faroe Islanders, Icelanders, and all who want to assist the TZM chapters in Scandinavia. It is now time to develop a strategy!

The goal is to reunite or get to know new people among the Scandinavian chapters, discuss our weaknesses within chapters, develop a better strategy to make TZM more effective, and to talk about preparations for the coming Zeitgeist European Meet-Up in Sweden next year.

See the rest here:

The Zeitgeist Movement | Organization for Global Social Change

About | The Zeitgeist Movement

What are some of the central characteristics of the solution proposed?

Automation of Labor

As the trend of what appears to be an exponential increase in the evolution of information technology, robotics, and computerization continues, it is apparent that human labor is becoming more and more inefficient in regard to meeting the demands necessary for supporting the global population. From the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, we have seen an increasing trend toward technological unemployment, which is the phenomenon where humans are replaced by machines in the work force. This trend, while debatable in regard to its ultimate long term effect on employment, creates a propensity to displace the worker and hence the consumer, slowing consumption.

That stated, this issue is actually overshadowed by a larger social imperative: That the use of machine labor (mechanization) is provably more efficient than human performance in virtually all sectors. For example, if one was to track the performance output of factory production within the US steel industry for the past 200 years, we find that not only do less than 5% of the workforce now work in such factories, the efficiency and output capacities have increased substantially. The trend, in fact, now shows that Employment is Inverse to Productivity. The more mechanization occurs, the more productive an industry becomes.

Today, there are repetitive occupations which simply do not need to exist given the state of automation and computerization (cybernation). Not only would mechanization in these areas reduce the mundane burden and allow more free time for people, it also would, more importantly, increase productivity. Machines do not need breaks, vacations, sleep, etc.. The use of mechanization on its own means to create many forms of abundance on this planet, from food to physical goods.

However, to do this, the traditional labor system we have simply cannot exist. The reality is that our labor for income system is stifling progress in its requirement to keep people working for the sake of economic stability. We are reaching a stage where the efficiency of automation is overriding and making obsolete the system of labor for income. This trend shows no sign of slowing, especially in regard to the now dominant Service Industry, which is increasingly being automated in the form of kiosks, robotics, and other forms. Likewise, due to phenomena related to Moores law and the growing in-expense of computers and machines, it is likely that it is simply a matter of time before corporations simply can no longer rationalize keeping human labor anymore, as the automation systems will become too cheap. Of course, this is a paradoxical market phenomenon, called by some theorists as the contradiction of capitalism, for it is, in effect, removing the consumer (laborer) itself and hence reducing consumption.

Apart from those issues, it is important to also consider human labor contributions based on social relevance, not monetary gain. In a RBE, there would be no reason to have occupations such as Banking, Trading, Insurance, Cashiers, Brokers, Advertising or anything related to the governance of money.

All human actions in the form of institutionalized labor should also have the highest social return. There is no logic in wasting resources, time, and energy on operations that do not have a direct and tangible function. This adjustment alone would remove millions of jobs, for the idea of working for money as a purpose would no longer exist.

In turn, all the poor demographic, shoddy goods, vanity items, and culturally contrived creations designed to influence people for reasons of status (for the sole sake of profit) would also no longer exist, saving countless amounts of time and resources.

One final note on this issue: Some hear this and they assume that this voids the Communicative Arts, and personal and social expression as far as painting, sculpture, music, and the like. No. These mediums of expression will likely thrive like never before, for the amount of free time made available to people will permit a renaissance of creativity and invention, along with community and social capital. The elimination of the burden of labor obligation will also reduce stress and create a more amiable culture.

There is a difference between creating for the sake of keeping society sustainable and efficient, focusing on resource preservation, product efficiency, and strategic allocation of labor for those things which generate a tangible social return versus creating for personal expression, exploration, experimentation, and hence art, which has been a staple of human evolution since the dawn of time.

Access over Property

The concept of property, unannounced to most people today, is a fairly new social concept. Before the neolithic revolution, as extrapolated from current hunter and gatherer societies existing today, property relationships did not exist as we know them. Neither did money, or even trade, in many cases. Communities existed in an egalitarian fashion, living within the carrying capacity of their regions and the natural production built in. It was only after direct agricultural development was discovered, eventually proceeding with resource acquisition by ship traders and the like up to modern day power establishments and corporations that property became a highly defined staple of society as we know it today.

With that understood, which dismisses the common notion that property is a result of some kind of empirical human nature, the notion of no property is also today often blindly associated with Communism and the works of Karl Marx. It is important to point out TZMs advocation of no property is derived from logical inference, based almost explicitly upon strategic resource management and efficiency, rather than any surface influence by these supposed Communist ideals. There is no relation between the two, for communism was not derived from the needs to preserve and manage resources efficiently. Communism, in theory and practice, was based on a social/moral relativism which was culturally specific not environmentally specific which is the case with a RBE.

The real issue relevant to meeting human needs is not ownership it is access. People use things; they do not own them. Ownership is a non-operational, protectionist advent, derived from generations of scarcity over resources, currently compounded by market-based advertising which supports status/class division for the sake of monetary gain . To put it another way, ownership is a form of controlled restriction, both physically and ideologically. Property as a system of controlled restriction, coupled with the monetary value inherent, and hence the market consequences, is unsustainable, limiting, and impractical.

In a NL/RBE model, the focus moves from static ownership to strategic access, with a system designed for society to obtain access as needed. For example, rather than owning various forms of recreational sporting equipment, Access Centers are set up, typically in regions where such actions occur, where a person simply checks out the equipment, uses it for as long as they want, and then returns it. This library type arrangement can be applied to virtually any type of human need. Of course, those reading this who have been conditioned into a more individualistic, materialistic mindset often objects with claims such as What if I want green, custom golf clubs, but only white are available?. This is a culturally contrived, biased reservation. The issue in question is utility, not vanity. Human expression has been molded by the needs of the current market based system (consumption) into values which are simply nonfunctional and irrelevant. Yes, this would require a value adjustment to quality rather than identity. The fact is, even for those who object from the standpoint of their interest in personal identity, the overarching social ramifications of such an social approach will create benefits that will greatly overshadow any such arbitrary personal preference, creating new values to replace the outdated ones.

These include : (a) No Property Crime: In a world of access rather than ownership, and without money, there is no incentive to steal, for there is no resale value. You can not steal something that no one owns and you certainly couldnt sell it. (b) Access Abundance: It has been denoted that the average automobile sits in parking spaces for the majority of its life span, wasting space and time. Rather than having this wasteful consequence of the ownership system, one car could facilitate a large number of users in a given region, with only a fraction of the production/resources needed. [c) Peak Efficiency of Production: Unlike today, where the market system must perpetuate inherently inferior products for the sake of economic turnover, we could actually design goods to last, using the best materials and processes strategically available. We no longer make cheap products to serve a poor demographic (which is the majority). This attribute alone will save cataclysmic amounts of resources, while also enabling a society to have access to goods and services that they would never have had in a world based on money, inherent obsolescence, and property.

Self-Contained/Localized City and Production Systems

There are many brilliant engineers who have worked to tackle the issue of industrial design; from Jacque Fresco, to R. Buckminster Fuller, to Nicola Tesla. Behind such designs, such as Jacque Frescos famed Circular Cities or Fullers Geodesic Domes, rests a basic train of thought: Strategic Efficiency and Maximization of Productivity.

For example, Frescos circular city is constructed of a series of belts, each serving a social function such a energy production, research, recreation, living, etc.. Each city is a hence a system, where all needs are produced within the city complex, in a localized fashion, whenever possible. For example, renewable energy generation occurs near the outer perimeter. Food production is produced closer to the middle within industrial-sized greenhouses.

This is very different in its logic from the globalization-based economy we live in today, which wastes outrageous amounts of energy and resources due to unneeded transport and labor processing. Likewise, transportation within the circular cities is strategically created to eliminate the use of detached automobiles, except for rare cases such as emergency vehicles. Homes are created to be micro-systems as well, with much power generation occurring internally, such as from sunlight absorbed by the building structure using photovoltaic technology. More information on these city system can be found at https://www.thevenusproject.com.

The Geodesic Dome, perfected by Buckminster Fuller, offers another efficiency oriented medium within a similar train of thought. Fullers goal was to build designs to do more with fewer resources. He noticed problems inherent in conventional construction techniques, and recognized the indigenous strength of naturally occurring structures. The advantages include: a much stronger structure than a conventional building while using less material to construct; domes can be built very quickly because they are of a modular prefab construction and suit being mass produced; They also use less energy to keep warm/cool than a conventional box structure. More information can be found at http://www.bfi.org/

In the end, the fundamental interest is, again, sustainability and efficiency on all levels, from the housing design to the earth design. The market system actually fights this efficiency due to the broken, competitive nature inherent.

Technological Unification of Earth via Systems Approach

We live in a symbiotic/synergistic planetary ecosystem, with a cause-effect balance reflecting a single system of earthy operation. Buckminster Fuller defined this well when he referred to the planet as Spaceship Earth. It is time we reflect this natural state of affairs in our societal affairs on this planet. The fact of the matter is that human societies, which are dispersed across the globe, require resources which are also un-uniformly dispersed across the globe. Our current procedure for enabling resource distribution comes in the form of corporations which seek and claim ownership of our earthly resources, which they in turn sell to others in the name of profit. The problems inherent in this practice are numerous, again due to the self-interest based disposition inherent in selling anything for personal gain, as denoted above. But in the larger scheme of things, this is only partially the issue when it come to the reality that we live on a finite planet, and where resource management and preservation should be the number one concern in regard to human survival, especially with the population explosion of the last 200 years.

Two people are born every second on this planet, and each one of those humans needs a lifetime of food, energy, water and the like. Given this fundamental need to understand what we have, the rates of depletion and, invariably, the need to streamline industry in the most efficient, productive way, a Global System of Resource Management must be put in place. It is just common sense. This is an extensive subject when one considers the technical, quantitative variables needed for implementation. However, for the sake of overview, it can be stated that the first step is a Full Global Survey of all earthly resources. Then, based on a quantitative analysis of the properties of each material, a strategically defined process of production is constructed from the bottom up, using such variables as negative retroactions, renewability, etc. (More on this can be found in the section called Project Earth in the ZM lecture called Where Are We Going?). Then consumption statistics are accessed, rates of depletion become monitored, distribution is logically formulated, etc.. In other words, it is a full Systems Approach to earthly resource management, production, and distribution, with the goal of absolute efficiency, conservation, and sustainability. Given the mathematically defined attributes, as based on all available information at the time, along with the state of technology at the time, the parameters for social operation within the industrial complex become self-evident, with decisions arrived at by way of computation, not human opinion. This is where computer intelligence becomes an important tool for social governance, for only the computation ability/programming of computers can access and strategically regulate such processes efficiently, and in real time. This technological application is not novel. It is simply scaled out from current methods already known.

The Scientific Method as the Methodology for Governance

The application of the scientific method for social concern is an oft-repeated mantra for the basis of social operation in a RBE model. While the obviousness of this in regard to industry is simple enough to understand, it is important to also realize its value in regard to human behavior. Science, historically speaking, has often been derailed as a cold, restrictive discipline, reserved for the sake of mere technology and invention. Little regard seems to be currently given to its use in the understanding of human behavior.

Superstitious thought, which has been powerfully dominant in human evolution, has worked on the basis that the human being was somehow detached from the physical world. We have souls; spirits; we are divine; we are related/guided by an all seeing, all knowing, controlling god, etc..

Conversely, yet oddly similar, there is an argument that humans have free will in their decisions and that we have the open ability to choose our actions, absent of the influence of our environment or even education. Now, while the vastness of the prior two statements and many reading those could find numerous cultural arguments to claim the contrary, this doesnt change the basic reality that we humans have historically liked to think that we are special and unique from the rest of the organisms and natural phenomena around us.

However, as time has gone on, it has become increasingly obvious that we are not special and that there is no such thing as special in the natural worldfor everything is special based on the uniqueness of all organisms. There is no reason to assume the human being is any more important or intrinsically different or special than a mole, a tree, an ant, a leaf or a cancer cell. This isnt New Age rhetoric it is fundamental logic. We are physical phenomena nothing more or less.

We are greatly influenced by our culture and our values and behaviors can only mostly be a result of our conditioning, as external phenomena interacts with our genetic predispositions. For example, we have a notion called talent, which is another word for a genetic predisposition to a given behavior, or set of behaviors. A piano prodigy might have an inherent ability that enables them to learn more quickly and perform in a more acute way than another, who has spent the same time in practice, but doesnt have the genetic predisposition. Be that as it may, that talented person still had to learn what a piano was and how to play it. In other words, genes are not autonomous initiators of commands. It takes an environmental trigger to allow for the propensity to materialize.

At any rate, it is not the point of this article to expand on the argument of nature and nurture. The point is that we have proven to be scientifically defined and a product of a traceable causality and it is this understanding that can allow us to slow and even stop the aberrant, or criminal behavior we see in society today such a abuse, murder, theft and the like. The logic, once the effects of human conditioning are understood, is to remove the environmental attributes which are enabling the reactions.

Just as an abused dog who has been starved for a week might have a knee jerk reaction to react very violently to an otherwise innocuous passerby, we humans have the same behavior dynamic. If you dont want people to steal food, do not deprive them of it. It has been found that prisons are now generating more violence than they are curbing. If you teach a child to be a hateful racist, then he will carry those values into the rest his life, very often. Human values and hence human behavior are shaped by the environment in a cause and effect based way, no different than a leaf being blown by the wind.

In a RBEM, the central focus in regard to removing aberrant human actions is not to punish them, but to find the reasons for their offensive actions and work to eliminate them. Humans are products of their environment and personal/social reform is a scientific process.

Moving away from money and markets

Market theory assumes a number of things which have proven to either be false, marginally beneficial, or outright socially detrimental.

The core problems to consider are the following:

A) The need for Infinite Growth, which is mathematically unsustainable and ecologically detrimental. The entire basis of the Market System is not the intelligent management of our mostly finite resources on this planet, but rather the perpetual extraction and consumption of them for the sake of profit and economic growth. In order to keep people employed, people must constantly consume, regardless of the state of affairs within the environment, and often regardless of product utility. This is the absolute reverse of what a sustainable practice would require, which is the strategic preservation and efficient use of resources.

B) A Corruption Generating Incentive System. It is often said that the competitive marketplace creates the incentive to act for the sake of social progress. While this is partially true, it also generates an equal if not more pronounced amount of corruption in the form of planned obsolescence, common crime, wars, large scale financial fraud, labor exploitation, and many other issues. The vast majority of people in prison today are there because of monetary-related crime or non-violent drug offenses. The majority of legislation exists in the context of monetary-based crimes.

Also, if one was to critically examine history and peer into the documented biographies/mentalities of the greatest scientists and inventors of our time, such a N. Tesla, A. Einstein, A. Bell, the Wright Brothers, and many others it is found that they did not find their motivation in the prospect of monetary gain. The interest to make money must not be confused with the interest to create socially beneficial products and very often they are even at odds.

C) A disjunct, inefficient industrial complex which wastes tremendous amount of resources and energy. In the world today, with the advent of Globalization, it has become more profitable to import and export both labor and goods across the globe rather than to produce locally. We import bananas from Ecuador to the US and bottled water from Fuji Japan, while western companies will go to the deprived 3rd world to exploit cheap labor, etc.. Likewise, the process of extraction, to component generation, to assembly, to distribution of a given good might cross through multiple countries for a single final product, simply due to labor and production costs / property costs. This cost efficiency generates extreme technical inefficiency and is only justifiable within the market system for the sake of saving money.

In a RBE model, the focus is maximum technical efficiency. The production process is not dispersed, but made as centralized and fluid as possible, with elements moving the very least amount, saving what would be tremendous amounts of energy and labor as compared to methods today. Food is grown locally whenever possible (which is most of the time given the flexibility of indoor agriculture technology today), while all extraction, production and distribution is logically organized to use as little labor/transport/space as possible while producing the strategically best possible goods (see more below). In other words, the system is planned to maximize efficiently and minimize waste.

D) A propensity for Establishments. Very simply, established corporate/financial orders have a built-in tendency to stop new, socially positive advents from coming to fruition if there is a foreshadowed loss of market share, profit, and hence power. It is important to consider the basic nature of a corporation and its inherent need for self-perpetuation.

If a person starts a company, hires employees, creates a market and becomes profitable, what has thus been created, in part, is the means for survival for a group of people. Since each person in that group typically becomes dependent on that organization for income, a natural, protectionist propensity is created whereas anything that threatens the institution thus threatens the well-being of the group/individual. This is the fabric of a competition mindset. While people think of free market competition as a battle between two or more companies in a given industry, they often miss the other level the competition against new advents which would make them obsolete, outright.

The best way to expand on this point is to simply give an example, such as the US Government and Big Oil collusion to limit the expansion of the fully Electric Car (EV) in the US. This issue was well-presented and sourced in the documentary called Who Killed the Electric Car?. The bottom line here is that the need to preserve an established order for the sake of the well-being of those on the payroll, leads to an inherent tendency to stifle progress. A new technology which can make a prior technology obsolete will be met with resistance unless there is a way for the market system to absorb it in a slow fashion, allowing for a transition for the corporations (i.e. the perpetuation of Hybrid cars in the US, as opposed to the fully electric ones which could exist now, in abundance). There is also a large amount of evidence that the FDA has engaged in favoritism/collusion with pharmaceutical companies to limit/stop the availability of advanced progressive drugs which would void existing/profitable ones.

In a RBE, there is nothing to hold back developmental/implementation of anything. If safe and useful, it would immediately be implemented into society, with no monetary institution to thwart the change due to their self-preserving, monetary nature.

E) An inherent obsolescence which creates inferior products immediately due to the need to stay competitive This little recognized attribute of production is another example of the waste which is created in the market system. It is bad enough that multiple companies constantly duplicate each others items in an attempt to make their variations more interesting for the sake of public consumption, but a more wasteful reality is that, due to the competitive basis of the system, it is a mathematical certainty that every good produced is immediately inferior the moment it is created, due the need to cut the initial cost basis of production and hence stay competitive against another company which is doing the same thing for the same reason. The old free market adage where producers create the best possible goods at the lowest possible prices is a needlessly wasteful fantasy and detrimentally misleading, for it is impossible for a company to use the most efficient material or processes in the production of anything, as it would be too expensive to maintain a competitive cost basis.

They very simply cannot make the strategically best physically it is mathematically impossible. If they did, no one would buy it, for it would be unaffordable due the values inherent in the higher quality materials and methods. Remember people buy what they can afford to. Every person on this planet has a built in limit of affordability in the monetary system, so it generates a feedback loop of constant waste via inferior production, to meet inferior demand. In a RBEM, goods are created to last, with the expansion and updating of certain goods built directly into the design, and with recycling strategically accessed as well, limiting waste.

You will notice the term strategically best was used in a statement above. This qualification means that goods are created with respect to the state of affairs of planetary resources, with the quality of materials used based on an equation taking into account all relevant attributes, rates of depletion, negative retroactions, and the like. In other words, we would not blindly use titanium for, say, every single computer enclosure made, just because it might be the strongest materials for the job. That narrow practice could lead to depletion. Rather, there would be a gradient of material quality which would be accessed through analysis of relevant attributes such as comparable resources, rates of natural obsolescence for a given item, statistical usage in the community, etc. These properties and relationships could be assessed through programming, with the most strategically viable solution computed and output in real-time. It is mere issue of calculation.

F) A propensity for monopoly and cartel due to the basic motivation of growth and increased market share. This is a point that economic theorists will often deny under the assumption that open competition is self-regulating and that monopolies and cartels are extremely rare anomalies in a free-market system. This invisible hand assumption holds little validity, historically, not to mention the outstanding legislation around the issue which proves its infeasibility. In America, there have been numerous monopolies, such as Standard Oil and Microsoft. Cartels, which are essentially Monopolies by way of collusion between the largest competitors in an industry, are also persistent to this day, although perhaps less obvious to the casual observer. In any case, the free market itself does not resolve these issues it always takes the government to step in and break up the monopolies.

This aside, the more important point is that in an economy based on growth, it is only natural for a corporation to want to expand and hence dominate. After all, that is the basis of economic stability in the modern world expansion. Expansion of any corporation always gravitates toward monopoly or cartel, for, again, the basic drive of competition is to out-do your competitor. In other words, monopoly and cartel are absolutely natural in the competitive system. In fact, it is inevitable, for again, the very basis is to seek dominance over market share. The true detriment of this reality goes back to the point above the inherent propensity of an Establishment to preserve its institution. If a medical cartel is influencing the FDA, then new ideas which void that cartels income sources will often be fought, regardless of the social benefits being thwarted.

G) The market system is driven, in part, by Scarcity. The less there is of something, the more money that can be generated in the short term. This sets up a propensity for corporations to limit availability, and hence deny production abundance. It is simply against the very nature of what drives demand to create abundance. The Kimberly Diamond Mines in Africa have been documented in the past to burn diamonds in order to keep prices high. Diamonds are rare resources which take billions of years to be created. This is nothing but problematic. The world we live in should be based on the interest to generate an abundance for the worlds people, along with strategic preservation and streamlined methods to enable that abundance. This is a central reason why, as of 2010, there are over a billion people starving on the planet. It has nothing to do with an inability to produce food, and everything having to do with an inherent need to create/preserve scarcity for the sake of short term profits.

Abundance, Efficiency and Sustainability are, very simply, the enemies of profit. This scarcity logic also applies to the quality of goods. The idea of creating something that could last, say, a lifetime with little repair, is anathema to the market system, for it reduces consumption rates, which slows growth and creates systemic repercussions (loss of jobs, etc.). The scarcity attribute of the market system is nothing but detrimental for these reasons, not to mention that it doesnt even serve the role of efficient resource preservation, which is often claimed.

While supply and demand dictates that the less there is of something, the more it will be valued and hence the increased value will limit consumption, reducing the possibility of running out, the incentive to create scarcity, coupled with the inherent short term reward which results from scarcity driven based prices, nullifies the idea that this enables strategic preservation. We will likely never run out of oil in the current market system. Rather, the prices will become so high that no one can afford it, while those corporations who own the remaining oil will make a great deal of money off of the scarcity, regardless of the long term social ramifications. In other words, remaining scarce resources, existing in such high economic value that it limits their consumption, is not to be confused with preservation that is functional and strategic. True strategic preservation can only come from the direct management of the resource in question in regard to the most efficient technical applications of the resource in industry itself, not arbitrary, surface price relationships, absent of rational allocation.

View original post here:

About | The Zeitgeist Movement

Home – The Zeitgeist Movement US

The focus of Zeitgeist Movement has always been on educational and awareness activism both for ourselves and for our communities. Over the years, a number of events, books, talks, videos and images have been created by the Zeitgeist community for this purpose. If you are interesting in deepening your own understandings of the ways in which our traditional social institutions and values shape our behaviors and the processes by which we can consciously help to evolve those social preconditions, please explore further.

"The Zeitgeist Movement Defined, Realizing a New Train of Thought", the official, representative text of the global not-for-profit sustainability advocacy organization known as the Zeitgeist Movement(TZM) is a great place to start. This is a 320-page guide defining all of the core ideas of the Movement, documented with over 800 sources.

Read the rest here:

Home - The Zeitgeist Movement US

The Zeitgeist Movement | Organization for Global Social Change

Calling all Danes, Swedes, Finns, Norwegians, Faroe Islanders, Icelanders, and all who want to assist the TZM chapters in Scandinavia. It is now time to develop a strategy!

The goal is to reunite or get to know new people among the Scandinavian chapters, discuss our weaknesses within chapters, develop a better strategy to make TZM more effective, and to talk about preparations for the coming Zeitgeist European Meet-Up in Sweden next year.

Read the rest here:

The Zeitgeist Movement | Organization for Global Social Change

The Zeitgeist Movement – Wikipedia

Movement that emerged from the Zeitgeist movie series

The Zeitgeist Movement is an activist movement established in the United States in 2008 by Peter Joseph. The group is critical of market capitalism, describing it as structurally corrupt and wasteful of resources. According to The Daily Telegraph, the group dismisses historic religious concepts as misleading, and embraces sustainable ecology and scientific administration of society.[1][2][3][4] VC Reporter's Shane Cohn summarized the movement's charter as: "Our greatest social problems are the direct results of our economic system".[5]

An article in the Journal of Contemporary Religion describes the movement as an example of a "conspirituality", a synthesis of New Age spirituality and conspiracy theory.[6]

Michelle Goldberg of Tablet Magazine called the movement "the world's first Internet-based apocalyptic cult, with members who parrot the party line with cheerful, rote fidelity."[7] In her opinion, the movement is "devoted to a kind of sci-fi planetary communism", and the 2007 documentary that "sparked" the movement was "steeped in far-right, isolationist, and covertly anti-Semitic conspiracy theories."[7]

Alan Feuer of The New York Times said the movement was like "a utopian presentation of a money-free and computer-driven vision of the future, a wholesale reimagination of civilization, as if Karl Marx and Carl Sagan had hired John Lennon from his "Imagine" days to do no less than redesign the underlying structures of planetary life."[8]

The Zeitgeist Movement was formed in 2008 by Joseph shortly after the late 2008 release of Zeitgeist: Addendum, the second film in the Zeitgeist film series.[9][10]

Zeitgeist was first linked to the Venus Project. In April 2011, partnership between the two groups ended in an apparent power struggle, with Joseph commenting, "Without [the Zeitgeist Movement], [the Venus Project] doesnt exist it has nothing but ideas and has no viable method to bring it to light."[9]

The first Zeitgeist documentary which predates the organization Zeitgeist movement, borrowed from the works of Eustace Mullins, Lyndon LaRouche, and radio host Alex Jones.[7] Much of its footage was taken directly from Alex Jones documentaries.[7]

The group holds an annual event, Z-Day (or Zeitgeist Day), an "educational forum" held in March. The New York Times reported on the second Z-Day held at Manhattan Community College in New York in 2009 which included lectures by Peter Joseph and Jacque Fresco.[8] This event sold out with 900 people paying $10 each to attend. The event's organizers said that 450 connected events in 70 countries around the globe also took place.[8]

Originally posted here:

The Zeitgeist Movement - Wikipedia

About | The Zeitgeist Movement

What are some of the central characteristics of the solution proposed?

Automation of Labor

As the trend of what appears to be an exponential increase in the evolution of information technology, robotics, and computerization continues, it is apparent that human labor is becoming more and more inefficient in regard to meeting the demands necessary for supporting the global population. From the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, we have seen an increasing trend toward technological unemployment, which is the phenomenon where humans are replaced by machines in the work force. This trend, while debatable in regard to its ultimate long term effect on employment, creates a propensity to displace the worker and hence the consumer, slowing consumption.

That stated, this issue is actually overshadowed by a larger social imperative: That the use of machine labor (mechanization) is provably more efficient than human performance in virtually all sectors. For example, if one was to track the performance output of factory production within the US steel industry for the past 200 years, we find that not only do less than 5% of the workforce now work in such factories, the efficiency and output capacities have increased substantially. The trend, in fact, now shows that Employment is Inverse to Productivity. The more mechanization occurs, the more productive an industry becomes.

Today, there are repetitive occupations which simply do not need to exist given the state of automation and computerization (cybernation). Not only would mechanization in these areas reduce the mundane burden and allow more free time for people, it also would, more importantly, increase productivity. Machines do not need breaks, vacations, sleep, etc.. The use of mechanization on its own means to create many forms of abundance on this planet, from food to physical goods.

However, to do this, the traditional labor system we have simply cannot exist. The reality is that our labor for income system is stifling progress in its requirement to keep people working for the sake of economic stability. We are reaching a stage where the efficiency of automation is overriding and making obsolete the system of labor for income. This trend shows no sign of slowing, especially in regard to the now dominant Service Industry, which is increasingly being automated in the form of kiosks, robotics, and other forms. Likewise, due to phenomena related to Moores law and the growing in-expense of computers and machines, it is likely that it is simply a matter of time before corporations simply can no longer rationalize keeping human labor anymore, as the automation systems will become too cheap. Of course, this is a paradoxical market phenomenon, called by some theorists as the contradiction of capitalism, for it is, in effect, removing the consumer (laborer) itself and hence reducing consumption.

Apart from those issues, it is important to also consider human labor contributions based on social relevance, not monetary gain. In a RBE, there would be no reason to have occupations such as Banking, Trading, Insurance, Cashiers, Brokers, Advertising or anything related to the governance of money.

All human actions in the form of institutionalized labor should also have the highest social return. There is no logic in wasting resources, time, and energy on operations that do not have a direct and tangible function. This adjustment alone would remove millions of jobs, for the idea of working for money as a purpose would no longer exist.

In turn, all the poor demographic, shoddy goods, vanity items, and culturally contrived creations designed to influence people for reasons of status (for the sole sake of profit) would also no longer exist, saving countless amounts of time and resources.

One final note on this issue: Some hear this and they assume that this voids the Communicative Arts, and personal and social expression as far as painting, sculpture, music, and the like. No. These mediums of expression will likely thrive like never before, for the amount of free time made available to people will permit a renaissance of creativity and invention, along with community and social capital. The elimination of the burden of labor obligation will also reduce stress and create a more amiable culture.

There is a difference between creating for the sake of keeping society sustainable and efficient, focusing on resource preservation, product efficiency, and strategic allocation of labor for those things which generate a tangible social return versus creating for personal expression, exploration, experimentation, and hence art, which has been a staple of human evolution since the dawn of time.

Access over Property

The concept of property, unannounced to most people today, is a fairly new social concept. Before the neolithic revolution, as extrapolated from current hunter and gatherer societies existing today, property relationships did not exist as we know them. Neither did money, or even trade, in many cases. Communities existed in an egalitarian fashion, living within the carrying capacity of their regions and the natural production built in. It was only after direct agricultural development was discovered, eventually proceeding with resource acquisition by ship traders and the like up to modern day power establishments and corporations that property became a highly defined staple of society as we know it today.

With that understood, which dismisses the common notion that property is a result of some kind of empirical human nature, the notion of no property is also today often blindly associated with Communism and the works of Karl Marx. It is important to point out TZMs advocation of no property is derived from logical inference, based almost explicitly upon strategic resource management and efficiency, rather than any surface influence by these supposed Communist ideals. There is no relation between the two, for communism was not derived from the needs to preserve and manage resources efficiently. Communism, in theory and practice, was based on a social/moral relativism which was culturally specific not environmentally specific which is the case with a RBE.

The real issue relevant to meeting human needs is not ownership it is access. People use things; they do not own them. Ownership is a non-operational, protectionist advent, derived from generations of scarcity over resources, currently compounded by market-based advertising which supports status/class division for the sake of monetary gain . To put it another way, ownership is a form of controlled restriction, both physically and ideologically. Property as a system of controlled restriction, coupled with the monetary value inherent, and hence the market consequences, is unsustainable, limiting, and impractical.

In a NL/RBE model, the focus moves from static ownership to strategic access, with a system designed for society to obtain access as needed. For example, rather than owning various forms of recreational sporting equipment, Access Centers are set up, typically in regions where such actions occur, where a person simply checks out the equipment, uses it for as long as they want, and then returns it. This library type arrangement can be applied to virtually any type of human need. Of course, those reading this who have been conditioned into a more individualistic, materialistic mindset often objects with claims such as What if I want green, custom golf clubs, but only white are available?. This is a culturally contrived, biased reservation. The issue in question is utility, not vanity. Human expression has been molded by the needs of the current market based system (consumption) into values which are simply nonfunctional and irrelevant. Yes, this would require a value adjustment to quality rather than identity. The fact is, even for those who object from the standpoint of their interest in personal identity, the overarching social ramifications of such an social approach will create benefits that will greatly overshadow any such arbitrary personal preference, creating new values to replace the outdated ones.

These include : (a) No Property Crime: In a world of access rather than ownership, and without money, there is no incentive to steal, for there is no resale value. You can not steal something that no one owns and you certainly couldnt sell it. (b) Access Abundance: It has been denoted that the average automobile sits in parking spaces for the majority of its life span, wasting space and time. Rather than having this wasteful consequence of the ownership system, one car could facilitate a large number of users in a given region, with only a fraction of the production/resources needed. [c) Peak Efficiency of Production: Unlike today, where the market system must perpetuate inherently inferior products for the sake of economic turnover, we could actually design goods to last, using the best materials and processes strategically available. We no longer make cheap products to serve a poor demographic (which is the majority). This attribute alone will save cataclysmic amounts of resources, while also enabling a society to have access to goods and services that they would never have had in a world based on money, inherent obsolescence, and property.

Self-Contained/Localized City and Production Systems

There are many brilliant engineers who have worked to tackle the issue of industrial design; from Jacque Fresco, to R. Buckminster Fuller, to Nicola Tesla. Behind such designs, such as Jacque Frescos famed Circular Cities or Fullers Geodesic Domes, rests a basic train of thought: Strategic Efficiency and Maximization of Productivity.

For example, Frescos circular city is constructed of a series of belts, each serving a social function such a energy production, research, recreation, living, etc.. Each city is a hence a system, where all needs are produced within the city complex, in a localized fashion, whenever possible. For example, renewable energy generation occurs near the outer perimeter. Food production is produced closer to the middle within industrial-sized greenhouses.

This is very different in its logic from the globalization-based economy we live in today, which wastes outrageous amounts of energy and resources due to unneeded transport and labor processing. Likewise, transportation within the circular cities is strategically created to eliminate the use of detached automobiles, except for rare cases such as emergency vehicles. Homes are created to be micro-systems as well, with much power generation occurring internally, such as from sunlight absorbed by the building structure using photovoltaic technology. More information on these city system can be found at https://www.thevenusproject.com.

The Geodesic Dome, perfected by Buckminster Fuller, offers another efficiency oriented medium within a similar train of thought. Fullers goal was to build designs to do more with fewer resources. He noticed problems inherent in conventional construction techniques, and recognized the indigenous strength of naturally occurring structures. The advantages include: a much stronger structure than a conventional building while using less material to construct; domes can be built very quickly because they are of a modular prefab construction and suit being mass produced; They also use less energy to keep warm/cool than a conventional box structure. More information can be found at http://www.bfi.org/

In the end, the fundamental interest is, again, sustainability and efficiency on all levels, from the housing design to the earth design. The market system actually fights this efficiency due to the broken, competitive nature inherent.

Technological Unification of Earth via Systems Approach

We live in a symbiotic/synergistic planetary ecosystem, with a cause-effect balance reflecting a single system of earthy operation. Buckminster Fuller defined this well when he referred to the planet as Spaceship Earth. It is time we reflect this natural state of affairs in our societal affairs on this planet. The fact of the matter is that human societies, which are dispersed across the globe, require resources which are also un-uniformly dispersed across the globe. Our current procedure for enabling resource distribution comes in the form of corporations which seek and claim ownership of our earthly resources, which they in turn sell to others in the name of profit. The problems inherent in this practice are numerous, again due to the self-interest based disposition inherent in selling anything for personal gain, as denoted above. But in the larger scheme of things, this is only partially the issue when it come to the reality that we live on a finite planet, and where resource management and preservation should be the number one concern in regard to human survival, especially with the population explosion of the last 200 years.

Two people are born every second on this planet, and each one of those humans needs a lifetime of food, energy, water and the like. Given this fundamental need to understand what we have, the rates of depletion and, invariably, the need to streamline industry in the most efficient, productive way, a Global System of Resource Management must be put in place. It is just common sense. This is an extensive subject when one considers the technical, quantitative variables needed for implementation. However, for the sake of overview, it can be stated that the first step is a Full Global Survey of all earthly resources. Then, based on a quantitative analysis of the properties of each material, a strategically defined process of production is constructed from the bottom up, using such variables as negative retroactions, renewability, etc. (More on this can be found in the section called Project Earth in the ZM lecture called Where Are We Going?). Then consumption statistics are accessed, rates of depletion become monitored, distribution is logically formulated, etc.. In other words, it is a full Systems Approach to earthly resource management, production, and distribution, with the goal of absolute efficiency, conservation, and sustainability. Given the mathematically defined attributes, as based on all available information at the time, along with the state of technology at the time, the parameters for social operation within the industrial complex become self-evident, with decisions arrived at by way of computation, not human opinion. This is where computer intelligence becomes an important tool for social governance, for only the computation ability/programming of computers can access and strategically regulate such processes efficiently, and in real time. This technological application is not novel. It is simply scaled out from current methods already known.

The Scientific Method as the Methodology for Governance

The application of the scientific method for social concern is an oft-repeated mantra for the basis of social operation in a RBE model. While the obviousness of this in regard to industry is simple enough to understand, it is important to also realize its value in regard to human behavior. Science, historically speaking, has often been derailed as a cold, restrictive discipline, reserved for the sake of mere technology and invention. Little regard seems to be currently given to its use in the understanding of human behavior.

Superstitious thought, which has been powerfully dominant in human evolution, has worked on the basis that the human being was somehow detached from the physical world. We have souls; spirits; we are divine; we are related/guided by an all seeing, all knowing, controlling god, etc..

Conversely, yet oddly similar, there is an argument that humans have free will in their decisions and that we have the open ability to choose our actions, absent of the influence of our environment or even education. Now, while the vastness of the prior two statements and many reading those could find numerous cultural arguments to claim the contrary, this doesnt change the basic reality that we humans have historically liked to think that we are special and unique from the rest of the organisms and natural phenomena around us.

However, as time has gone on, it has become increasingly obvious that we are not special and that there is no such thing as special in the natural worldfor everything is special based on the uniqueness of all organisms. There is no reason to assume the human being is any more important or intrinsically different or special than a mole, a tree, an ant, a leaf or a cancer cell. This isnt New Age rhetoric it is fundamental logic. We are physical phenomena nothing more or less.

We are greatly influenced by our culture and our values and behaviors can only mostly be a result of our conditioning, as external phenomena interacts with our genetic predispositions. For example, we have a notion called talent, which is another word for a genetic predisposition to a given behavior, or set of behaviors. A piano prodigy might have an inherent ability that enables them to learn more quickly and perform in a more acute way than another, who has spent the same time in practice, but doesnt have the genetic predisposition. Be that as it may, that talented person still had to learn what a piano was and how to play it. In other words, genes are not autonomous initiators of commands. It takes an environmental trigger to allow for the propensity to materialize.

At any rate, it is not the point of this article to expand on the argument of nature and nurture. The point is that we have proven to be scientifically defined and a product of a traceable causality and it is this understanding that can allow us to slow and even stop the aberrant, or criminal behavior we see in society today such a abuse, murder, theft and the like. The logic, once the effects of human conditioning are understood, is to remove the environmental attributes which are enabling the reactions.

Just as an abused dog who has been starved for a week might have a knee jerk reaction to react very violently to an otherwise innocuous passerby, we humans have the same behavior dynamic. If you dont want people to steal food, do not deprive them of it. It has been found that prisons are now generating more violence than they are curbing. If you teach a child to be a hateful racist, then he will carry those values into the rest his life, very often. Human values and hence human behavior are shaped by the environment in a cause and effect based way, no different than a leaf being blown by the wind.

In a RBEM, the central focus in regard to removing aberrant human actions is not to punish them, but to find the reasons for their offensive actions and work to eliminate them. Humans are products of their environment and personal/social reform is a scientific process.

Moving away from money and markets

Market theory assumes a number of things which have proven to either be false, marginally beneficial, or outright socially detrimental.

The core problems to consider are the following:

A) The need for Infinite Growth, which is mathematically unsustainable and ecologically detrimental. The entire basis of the Market System is not the intelligent management of our mostly finite resources on this planet, but rather the perpetual extraction and consumption of them for the sake of profit and economic growth. In order to keep people employed, people must constantly consume, regardless of the state of affairs within the environment, and often regardless of product utility. This is the absolute reverse of what a sustainable practice would require, which is the strategic preservation and efficient use of resources.

B) A Corruption Generating Incentive System. It is often said that the competitive marketplace creates the incentive to act for the sake of social progress. While this is partially true, it also generates an equal if not more pronounced amount of corruption in the form of planned obsolescence, common crime, wars, large scale financial fraud, labor exploitation, and many other issues. The vast majority of people in prison today are there because of monetary-related crime or non-violent drug offenses. The majority of legislation exists in the context of monetary-based crimes.

Also, if one was to critically examine history and peer into the documented biographies/mentalities of the greatest scientists and inventors of our time, such a N. Tesla, A. Einstein, A. Bell, the Wright Brothers, and many others it is found that they did not find their motivation in the prospect of monetary gain. The interest to make money must not be confused with the interest to create socially beneficial products and very often they are even at odds.

C) A disjunct, inefficient industrial complex which wastes tremendous amount of resources and energy. In the world today, with the advent of Globalization, it has become more profitable to import and export both labor and goods across the globe rather than to produce locally. We import bananas from Ecuador to the US and bottled water from Fuji Japan, while western companies will go to the deprived 3rd world to exploit cheap labor, etc.. Likewise, the process of extraction, to component generation, to assembly, to distribution of a given good might cross through multiple countries for a single final product, simply due to labor and production costs / property costs. This cost efficiency generates extreme technical inefficiency and is only justifiable within the market system for the sake of saving money.

In a RBE model, the focus is maximum technical efficiency. The production process is not dispersed, but made as centralized and fluid as possible, with elements moving the very least amount, saving what would be tremendous amounts of energy and labor as compared to methods today. Food is grown locally whenever possible (which is most of the time given the flexibility of indoor agriculture technology today), while all extraction, production and distribution is logically organized to use as little labor/transport/space as possible while producing the strategically best possible goods (see more below). In other words, the system is planned to maximize efficiently and minimize waste.

D) A propensity for Establishments. Very simply, established corporate/financial orders have a built-in tendency to stop new, socially positive advents from coming to fruition if there is a foreshadowed loss of market share, profit, and hence power. It is important to consider the basic nature of a corporation and its inherent need for self-perpetuation.

If a person starts a company, hires employees, creates a market and becomes profitable, what has thus been created, in part, is the means for survival for a group of people. Since each person in that group typically becomes dependent on that organization for income, a natural, protectionist propensity is created whereas anything that threatens the institution thus threatens the well-being of the group/individual. This is the fabric of a competition mindset. While people think of free market competition as a battle between two or more companies in a given industry, they often miss the other level the competition against new advents which would make them obsolete, outright.

The best way to expand on this point is to simply give an example, such as the US Government and Big Oil collusion to limit the expansion of the fully Electric Car (EV) in the US. This issue was well-presented and sourced in the documentary called Who Killed the Electric Car?. The bottom line here is that the need to preserve an established order for the sake of the well-being of those on the payroll, leads to an inherent tendency to stifle progress. A new technology which can make a prior technology obsolete will be met with resistance unless there is a way for the market system to absorb it in a slow fashion, allowing for a transition for the corporations (i.e. the perpetuation of Hybrid cars in the US, as opposed to the fully electric ones which could exist now, in abundance). There is also a large amount of evidence that the FDA has engaged in favoritism/collusion with pharmaceutical companies to limit/stop the availability of advanced progressive drugs which would void existing/profitable ones.

In a RBE, there is nothing to hold back developmental/implementation of anything. If safe and useful, it would immediately be implemented into society, with no monetary institution to thwart the change due to their self-preserving, monetary nature.

E) An inherent obsolescence which creates inferior products immediately due to the need to stay competitive This little recognized attribute of production is another example of the waste which is created in the market system. It is bad enough that multiple companies constantly duplicate each others items in an attempt to make their variations more interesting for the sake of public consumption, but a more wasteful reality is that, due to the competitive basis of the system, it is a mathematical certainty that every good produced is immediately inferior the moment it is created, due the need to cut the initial cost basis of production and hence stay competitive against another company which is doing the same thing for the same reason. The old free market adage where producers create the best possible goods at the lowest possible prices is a needlessly wasteful fantasy and detrimentally misleading, for it is impossible for a company to use the most efficient material or processes in the production of anything, as it would be too expensive to maintain a competitive cost basis.

They very simply cannot make the strategically best physically it is mathematically impossible. If they did, no one would buy it, for it would be unaffordable due the values inherent in the higher quality materials and methods. Remember people buy what they can afford to. Every person on this planet has a built in limit of affordability in the monetary system, so it generates a feedback loop of constant waste via inferior production, to meet inferior demand. In a RBEM, goods are created to last, with the expansion and updating of certain goods built directly into the design, and with recycling strategically accessed as well, limiting waste.

You will notice the term strategically best was used in a statement above. This qualification means that goods are created with respect to the state of affairs of planetary resources, with the quality of materials used based on an equation taking into account all relevant attributes, rates of depletion, negative retroactions, and the like. In other words, we would not blindly use titanium for, say, every single computer enclosure made, just because it might be the strongest materials for the job. That narrow practice could lead to depletion. Rather, there would be a gradient of material quality which would be accessed through analysis of relevant attributes such as comparable resources, rates of natural obsolescence for a given item, statistical usage in the community, etc. These properties and relationships could be assessed through programming, with the most strategically viable solution computed and output in real-time. It is mere issue of calculation.

F) A propensity for monopoly and cartel due to the basic motivation of growth and increased market share. This is a point that economic theorists will often deny under the assumption that open competition is self-regulating and that monopolies and cartels are extremely rare anomalies in a free-market system. This invisible hand assumption holds little validity, historically, not to mention the outstanding legislation around the issue which proves its infeasibility. In America, there have been numerous monopolies, such as Standard Oil and Microsoft. Cartels, which are essentially Monopolies by way of collusion between the largest competitors in an industry, are also persistent to this day, although perhaps less obvious to the casual observer. In any case, the free market itself does not resolve these issues it always takes the government to step in and break up the monopolies.

This aside, the more important point is that in an economy based on growth, it is only natural for a corporation to want to expand and hence dominate. After all, that is the basis of economic stability in the modern world expansion. Expansion of any corporation always gravitates toward monopoly or cartel, for, again, the basic drive of competition is to out-do your competitor. In other words, monopoly and cartel are absolutely natural in the competitive system. In fact, it is inevitable, for again, the very basis is to seek dominance over market share. The true detriment of this reality goes back to the point above the inherent propensity of an Establishment to preserve its institution. If a medical cartel is influencing the FDA, then new ideas which void that cartels income sources will often be fought, regardless of the social benefits being thwarted.

G) The market system is driven, in part, by Scarcity. The less there is of something, the more money that can be generated in the short term. This sets up a propensity for corporations to limit availability, and hence deny production abundance. It is simply against the very nature of what drives demand to create abundance. The Kimberly Diamond Mines in Africa have been documented in the past to burn diamonds in order to keep prices high. Diamonds are rare resources which take billions of years to be created. This is nothing but problematic. The world we live in should be based on the interest to generate an abundance for the worlds people, along with strategic preservation and streamlined methods to enable that abundance. This is a central reason why, as of 2010, there are over a billion people starving on the planet. It has nothing to do with an inability to produce food, and everything having to do with an inherent need to create/preserve scarcity for the sake of short term profits.

Abundance, Efficiency and Sustainability are, very simply, the enemies of profit. This scarcity logic also applies to the quality of goods. The idea of creating something that could last, say, a lifetime with little repair, is anathema to the market system, for it reduces consumption rates, which slows growth and creates systemic repercussions (loss of jobs, etc.). The scarcity attribute of the market system is nothing but detrimental for these reasons, not to mention that it doesnt even serve the role of efficient resource preservation, which is often claimed.

While supply and demand dictates that the less there is of something, the more it will be valued and hence the increased value will limit consumption, reducing the possibility of running out, the incentive to create scarcity, coupled with the inherent short term reward which results from scarcity driven based prices, nullifies the idea that this enables strategic preservation. We will likely never run out of oil in the current market system. Rather, the prices will become so high that no one can afford it, while those corporations who own the remaining oil will make a great deal of money off of the scarcity, regardless of the long term social ramifications. In other words, remaining scarce resources, existing in such high economic value that it limits their consumption, is not to be confused with preservation that is functional and strategic. True strategic preservation can only come from the direct management of the resource in question in regard to the most efficient technical applications of the resource in industry itself, not arbitrary, surface price relationships, absent of rational allocation.

Visit link:

About | The Zeitgeist Movement

Zeitgeist (film series) – Wikipedia

Documentary film series

Zeitgeist is a series of three documentary films released between 2007 and 2011 that present a number of conspiracy theories, as well as proposals for broad social and economic changes.

Release date

Running time

Zeitgeist: The Movie is a 2007 film by Peter Joseph presenting a number of conspiracy theories.[1] The film assembles archival footage, animations and narration.[2] Released online on June 18, 2007, it soon received tens of millions of views on Google Video, YouTube, and Vimeo.[3] According to Peter Joseph, the original Zeitgeist was not presented in a film format, but was a "performance piece consisting of a vaudevillian, multimedia style event using recorded music, live instruments, and video".[3]

The film's introduction features animations, footage of war, explosions, and the September 11 attacks and audio quotes from Chgyam Trungpa Rinpoche and George Carlin.

Part I claims that the Christian religion is mainly derived from other religions, astronomical assertions, astrological myths, and other traditions. In furtherance of the Jesus myth hypothesis, this part disputes the historicity of Jesus, who, it claims, is a literary and astrological hybrid, nurtured by political forces and opportunists. Part I was influenced by the work of Acharya S.[4]

Part II alleges that the September 11 attacks were either orchestrated or allowed to happen by elements within the United States government in order to generate mass fear, justify the War on Terror, provide a pretext for the curtailment of civil liberties, and produce economic gain. It asserts that the U.S. government had advance knowledge of the attacks, that the military deliberately allowed the planes to reach their targets, and that World Trade Center buildings 1, 2, and 7 underwent a controlled demolition.

Part III states that the Federal Reserve System is controlled by a small cabal of international bankers who conspire to create global calamities to enrich themselves.[2] Three wars involving the United States during the twentieth century are highlighted as part of this alleged agenda, started by specifically engineered events, including the sinking of the RMS Lusitania, the attack on Pearl Harbor, and the Gulf of Tonkin Incident. The film asserts that such wars serve to sustain conflict in general and force the U.S. government to borrow money, thereby increasing the profits of the international bankers. The film also claims that the Federal Income Tax is illegal.

Part III also alleges a secret agreement to merge the United States, Canada and Mexico into a North American Union as a step toward the creation of a single world government. The film speculates that under such a government, every human could be implanted with an RFID chip to monitor individual activity and suppress dissent.

The first film received almost universal condemnation from the media, though it also "attracted massive interest" from the public.[3][5]

The newspaper The Arizona Republic described Zeitgeist: The Movie as "a bramble of conspiracy theories involving Sept. 11, the international monetary system, and Christianity" saying also that the movie trailer states that "there are people guiding your life and you don't even know it".[6]

A review in The Irish Times wrote that "these are surreal perversions of genuine issues and debates, and they tarnish all criticism of faith, the Bush administration, and globalizationthere are more than enough factual injustices in this world to be going around without having to invent fictional ones".[5]

Ivor Tossell in The Globe and Mail cited it as an example of how modern conspiracy theories are promulgated, though he praised its effectiveness:

The film is an interesting object lesson on how conspiracy theories get to be so popular ... It's a driven, if uneven, piece of propaganda, a marvel of tight editing and fuzzy thinking. Its on-camera sources are mostly conspiracy theorists, co-mingled with selective eyewitness accounts, drawn from archival footage and often taken out of context. It derides the media as a pawn of the International Bankers, but produces media reports for credibility when convenient. The film ignores expert opinion, except the handful of experts who agree with it. And yet, it's compelling. It shamelessly ploughs forward, connecting dots with an earnest certainty that makes you want to give it an A for effort.[2]

Filipe Feio, reflecting upon the film's Internet popularity in Dirio de Notcias, stated that "[f]iction or not, Zeitgeist: The Movie threatens to become the champion of conspiracy theories of today".[7]

Michael Shermer, founder of the Skeptics Society, mentioned Zeitgeist in an article in Scientific American on skepticism in the age of mass media and the postmodern belief in the relativism of truth. He argues that this belief, coupled with a "clicker culture of mass media," results in a multitude of various truth claims packaged in "infotainment units", in the form of films such as Zeitgeist and Loose Change.[8]

Jane Chapman, a film producer and reader in media studies at the University of Lincoln, called Zeitgeist "a fast-paced assemblage of agitprop," an example of "unethical film-making".[9] Chapman accused Peter Joseph of "implicit deception" through the use of standard film-making propaganda techniques. While parts of the film are, she says, "comically" self-defeating, the nature of "twisted evidence" and use of Madrid bomb footage to imply it is of the London bombings amount to "ethical abuse in sourcing". She finishes her analysis with the comment: "Thus, legitimate questions about what happened on 9/11, and about corruption in religious and financial organizations, are all undermined by the film's determined effort to maximize an emotional response at the expense of reasoned argument."

Alex Jones, American radio host, conspiracy theorist and executive producer of Loose Change, stated that film segments of Zeitgeist are taken directly from his documentary Terrorstorm, and that he supports "90 percent" of the film.[10]

Skeptic magazine's Tim Callahan, criticizing the parts of the film on the origins of Christianity, wrote that "some of what it asserts is true. Unfortunately, this material is liberallyand sloppilymixed with material that is only partially true and much that is plainly and simply bogus."[11]

Chris Forbes, Senior lecturer in Ancient History of Macquarie University and member of the Synod of the Diocese of Sydney, severely criticized Part I of the film, stating that it has no basis in serious scholarship or ancient sources, and that it relies on amateur sources that recycle frivolous ideas from one another, commenting that "[i]t is extraordinary how many claims it makes which are simply not true".[12] Similar conclusions were reached by Dr. Mark Foreman of Liberty University.[13]

In Tablet magazine, journalist Michelle Goldberg criticized Zeitgeist: The Movie as being "steeped in far-right, isolationist, and covertly anti-Semitic conspiracy theories," writing that the film borrowed from the work of Eustace Mullins, Lyndon LaRouche, and radio host Alex Jones, and that it portrays a cabal of international bankers purportedly ruling the world.[3] In an interview with TheMarker, Joseph said that while the film does mention bankers it does not seek to blame any individual or group of individuals. He argued they are merely a product of a socioeconomic system in need of change.[14]

Chip Berlet wrote that the 9/11 conspiracy theories "are bait used to attract viewers from the 9/11 Truth movement and others who embrace conspiracist thinking to the idiosyncratic antireligion views of the videographer and the world of right-wing antisemitic theories of a global banking conspiracy".[15]

Jay Kinney questioned the accuracy of its claims and the quality of its arguments, describing it as agitprop and propaganda.[16] At times, according to Kinney, "Zeitgeist engages in willful confusion by showing TV screen shots of network or cable news with voice-overs from unidentified people not associated with the news programs. If one weren't paying close attention, the effect would be to confer the status and authority of TV news upon the words being spoken. Even when quotes or sound bites are attributed to a source, there's no way to tell if they are quoted correctly or in context."[16]

In June 2013, Peter Joseph directed the music video for "God Is Dead?" by Black Sabbath, using extensive imagery from Zeitgeist: The Movie and its sequels.[17]

Release date

Running time

Zeitgeist: Addendum is a 2008 film produced and directed by Peter Joseph, and is a sequel to the 2007 film, Zeitgeist: The Movie. It premiered at the 5th Annual Artivist Film Festival in Los Angeles, California on October 2, 2008.[citation needed]

The film begins and ends with excerpts from a speech by Jiddu Krishnamurti. The remainder of the film is narrated by Peter Joseph and divided into four parts, which are prefaced by on-screen quotations from Krishnamurti, John Adams, Bernard Lietaer, and Thomas Paine, respectively.

Part I covers the process of fractional-reserve banking as illustrated in Modern Money Mechanics, by the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago. The film suggests that society is manipulated into economic slavery through debt-based monetary policies by requiring individuals to submit for employment in order to pay off their debt.

Part II has an interview with John Perkins, author of Confessions of an Economic Hitman, who says he was involved in the subjugation of Latin American economies by multinational corporations and the United States government, including involvement in the overthrow of Latin American heads-of-state. Perkins sees the US as a corporatocracy, in which maximization of profits is the first priority.

Part III introduces futurist Jacque Fresco and The Venus Project and asserts a need to move away from current socioeconomic paradigms. Fresco states that capitalism perpetuates the conditions it claims to address, as problems are only solved if there is money to be made. The film looks at Fresco's proposal of a resource-based economy, which puts environmental friendliness, sustainability and abundance as fundamental societal goals. He goes on to discuss technology which he sees as the primary driver of human advancement, and he describes politics as being unable to solve any problems.

Part IV suggests that the primary reason for what the film sees as society's social values ("warfare, corruption, oppressive laws, social stratification, irrelevant superstitions, environmental destruction, and a despotic, socially indifferent, profit oriented ruling class") is a collective ignorance of "the emergent and symbiotic aspects of natural law". The film advocates the following actions for achieving social change: boycotting of the most powerful banks in the Federal Reserve System, the major news networks, the military, energy corporations, all political systems; and joining, and supporting The Zeitgeist Movement.

Zeitgeist: Addendum won the 2008 Artivist Film Festival's award for best feature ("Artivist Spirit" category).[18]

Originally, the film was uploaded-released on Google Video. The current video posting on YouTube surpassed 5 million views by late 2013.[19]

Alan Feuer of The New York Times noted that while the first film was famous for alleging that the attacks of September 11 were an inside job, the second, "was all but empty of such conspiratorial notions, directing its rhetoric and high production values toward posing a replacement for the evils of the banking system and a perilous economy of scarcity and debt".[20]

Zeitgeist: Moving Forward is the third installment in Peter Joseph's Zeitgeist film series. The film premiered at the JACC Theater in Los Angeles on January 15, 2011 at the Artivist Film Festival,[21] was released in theaters and online. As of November 2014, the film had over 23 million views on YouTube. The film is arranged in four parts, each containing interviews, narration and animated sequences.[22]

Release date

Running time

The film begins with an animated sequence narrated by Jacque Fresco. He describes his adolescent life and his discontinuation of public education at the age of 14 and describes his early life influences.

Part I: Human Nature

Human behavior and the nature vs. nurture debate is discussed, which Robert Sapolsky refers to as a "false dichotomy." Disease, criminal activity, and addictions are also discussed. The overall conclusion of Part I is that social environment and cultural conditioning play a large part in shaping human behavior.

Part II: Social Pathology

John Locke and Adam Smith are discussed in regard to modern economics. The film critically questions the economic need for private property, money, and the inherent inequality between agents in the system. Also seen critically is the need for cyclical consumption in order to maintain market share, resulting in wasted resources and planned obsolescence. According to the movie, the current monetary system will result in default or hyperinflation at some future time.

Part III: Project Earth

As with Zeitgeist: Addendum, the film presents a "resource-based economy" as advocated by Jacque Fresco discussing how human civilization could start from a new beginning in relation to resource types, locations, quantities, to satisfy human demands; track the consumption and depletion of resources to regulate human demands and maintain the condition of the environment.

Part IV: Rise

The current worldwide situation is described as disastrous. A case is presented that pollution, deforestation, climate change, overpopulation, and warfare are all created and perpetuated by the socioeconomic system. Various poverty statistics are shown that suggest a progressive worsening of world culture.

The final scene of the film shows a partial view of earth from space, followed by a sequence of superimposed statements; "This is your world", "This is our world", and "The revolution is now".

List of Interviewees

Zeitgeist: Moving Forward received "Best Political Documentary" in 2011 from the Action on Film International Film Festival.[23]

A The Socialist Standard review said the film's use of animation and humour gave it a "well rounded feel", though it criticized the "shaky economic analysis" in the second part of the film, saying "Karl Marx had already undertaken a more scientific analysis", adding, "the analysis is at least on the right track". Regarding transition to the new system proposed in the film, the reviewer noted "there is no mention of how to get from here to there".[24]

In an article, in Tablet magazine, Michelle Goldberg described the film as "silly enough that at times [she] suspected it was [a] sly satire about new-age techno-utopianism instead of an example of it".[3] She describes the 3 Zeitgeist movies as "a series of 3 apocalyptic cult documentaries.[3]

Zeitgeist: The Movie (2007) started the chain of events leading to the formation of the Zeitgeist movement.[3] The group advocates transition from the global money-based economic system to a post-scarcity economy or resource-based economy. VC Reporter's Shane Cohn summarized the movement's charter as: "Our greatest social problems are the direct results of our economic system".[25] Joseph created a political movement that, according to The Daily Telegraph, dismisses historic religious concepts as misleading and embraces a version of sustainable ecological concepts and scientific administration of society.[26] The group describes the current socioeconomic system as structurally corrupt and inefficient in the use of resources.[20][27] Michelle Goldberg described the Zeitgeist movement as "the first Internet-based apocalyptic cult".[3]

Links to related articles

Read the original:

Zeitgeist (film series) - Wikipedia

The Zeitgeist Movement – Skeptic Project

Author: Edward L WinstonAdded: June 13, 2010Discuss: Discuss this article.

Over the last couple of months, mainly since Zeitgeist Movement (TZM) members began trekking to our forums, I've gotten a lot of emails from TZM members asking me various questions. This post is to outline the topics covered in my correspondence with said members.

I'll likely update this page as I get feedback from people.

Primarily the issues discussed are why I believe TZM will fail and why I think it's impossible to find common ground with TZM. I want to be clear that, given a different set of circumstances which I will discuss, maybe TZM could be successful and we could find common ground, but if things don't change, neither will my stance.

The leader of TZM, Peter Joseph, is far more damaging to his own movement than I imagine many of the hardcore members want to believe:

More could be said about Peter Joseph, and is said in later sections, but our forums are full of former TZM members who shed even more light on the emerging cult of personality around him.

The most important issue here is that Peter Joseph is the leader of TZM and his word is law, despite claiming that he doesn't consider himself the leader, he acts unilaterally to forbid members for talking to outsiders, for example banning members who post on our forums that aren't glorifying him.

Something that I never stop hearing is the phrase the movies aren't the movement. This referring to the fact that the movies promote conspiracy theories, but TZM is something else entirely, and exists separately from the movement. I would believe that if not for the following issues:

A lot of people don't like that I use foul language, but I needed to display the utter lack of compassion for other human beings TZM leadership seems to have, as well as some hardcore members. The situation in Haiti, again, is a great example of this -- reading many posts on the forums from members, it's quite clear that unless The Venus Project (TVP) is going to be the solution to the problems in Haiti, there's no use in helping them after the earthquake there.

I get asked "well, what are YOU doing to improve the world?" by TZM members a lot. I constantly bring up that I volunteer pretty much every weekend and I donate 10% of my income to charity, and a lot of time I will donate more than that. Most come back with the fact "charity doesn't fix the problem." While they're right that charity doesn't fix the problem permanently, sitting on a forum doesn't either -- though some members have the audacity to claim that TZM is a charity, despite never lifting a finger for anyone else.

The example I use when talking to TZM members about this is:

If you saw a starving/dying man in the street, would you do something to help him, or would you say "once our movement gets to 50 million members, I'll be able to help you, but until then, see you later!"?

That's essentially the logic behind the leadership of TZM and what many members parrot to me, just in a much nicer way. They love talking about how many children are starving to death today, but they refuse to help them today, and instead speak of some far off future that they can't figure out how to get to.

I know and understand that not all TZM members are like this. I've seen some wonderful generosity and so forth coming from members, but more often than not, these members also don't follow Peter Joseph blindly, because the ones that do refuse to help anyone else.

Here's a list of problems that I believe TZM has:

There could be more added here later.

I don't really see a future for TZM outside of degrading to hardcore members. Peter Joseph talks about a new movie coming out in October of 2010 that's going to get "millions" of new members, so essentially nearly 2 years of doing nothing but waiting for yet another film are what TZM has to show for.

I think it's all a shame, however, because getting all of those people together could have done something, could have lead to actual success in some way, but it's not even close to that. This hasn't stopped members from discussing the transition to the Resource Based Economy, despite the fact they're discussing step 10,000 when they haven't even reached step 1 and don't seem to want to.

At this point is essentially a way to stroke Peter Joseph's ego rather than accomplish any goals.

Sometimes I'm asked what I'd change about TZM, in order to make it more acceptable. Well, while I don't think most of these changes are possible due to the way TZM is run, I usually humor those who ask:

So, essentially my "5 point plan" is completely incompatible with a movement where Peter Joseph is the overlord.

Would you like to know more?

Original post:

The Zeitgeist Movement - Skeptic Project

The Zeitgeist Movement – Wikipedia

Movement that emerged from the Zeitgeist movie series

The Zeitgeist Movement is an activist movement established in the United States in 2008 by Peter Joseph. The group is critical of market capitalism, describing it as structurally corrupt and wasteful of resources. According to The Daily Telegraph, the group dismisses historic religious concepts as misleading, and embraces sustainable ecology and scientific administration of society.[1][2][3][4] VC Reporter's Shane Cohn summarized the movement's charter as: "Our greatest social problems are the direct results of our economic system".[5]

An article in the Journal of Contemporary Religion describes the movement as an example of a "conspirituality", a synthesis of New Age spirituality and conspiracy theory.[6]

Michelle Goldberg of Tablet Magazine called the movement "the world's first Internet-based apocalyptic cult, with members who parrot the party line with cheerful, rote fidelity."[7] In her opinion, the movement is "devoted to a kind of sci-fi planetary communism", and the 2007 documentary that "sparked" the movement was "steeped in far-right, isolationist, and covertly anti-Semitic conspiracy theories."[7]

Alan Feuer of The New York Times said the movement was like "a utopian presentation of a money-free and computer-driven vision of the future, a wholesale reimagination of civilization, as if Karl Marx and Carl Sagan had hired John Lennon from his "Imagine" days to do no less than redesign the underlying structures of planetary life."[8]

The Zeitgeist Movement was formed in 2008 by Joseph shortly after the late 2008 release of Zeitgeist: Addendum, the second film in the Zeitgeist film series.[9][10]

Zeitgeist was first linked to the Venus Project. In April 2011, partnership between the two groups ended in an apparent power struggle, with Joseph commenting, "Without [the Zeitgeist Movement], [the Venus Project] doesnt exist it has nothing but ideas and has no viable method to bring it to light."[9]

The first Zeitgeist documentary which predates the organization Zeitgeist movement, borrowed from the works of Eustace Mullins, Lyndon LaRouche, and radio host Alex Jones.[7] Much of its footage was taken directly from Alex Jones documentaries.[7]

The group holds an annual event, Z-Day (or Zeitgeist Day), an "educational forum" held in March. The New York Times reported on the second Z-Day held at Manhattan Community College in New York in 2009 which included lectures by Peter Joseph and Jacque Fresco.[8] This event sold out with 900 people paying $10 each to attend. The event's organizers said that 450 connected events in 70 countries around the globe also took place.[8]

Visit link:

The Zeitgeist Movement - Wikipedia

Zeitgeist (film series) – Wikipedia

Documentary film series

Zeitgeist is a series of three documentary films released between 2007 and 2011 that present a number of conspiracy theories, as well as proposals for broad social and economic changes.

Release date

Running time

Zeitgeist: The Movie is a 2007 film by Peter Joseph presenting a number of conspiracy theories.[1] The film assembles archival footage, animations and narration.[2] Released online on June 18, 2007, it soon received tens of millions of views on Google Video, YouTube, and Vimeo.[3] According to Peter Joseph, the original Zeitgeist was not presented in a film format, but was a "performance piece consisting of a vaudevillian, multimedia style event using recorded music, live instruments, and video".[3]

The film's introduction features animations, footage of war, explosions, and the September 11 attacks and audio quotes from Chgyam Trungpa Rinpoche and George Carlin.

Part I claims that the Christian religion is mainly derived from other religions, astronomical assertions, astrological myths, and other traditions. In furtherance of the Jesus myth hypothesis, this part disputes the historicity of Jesus, who, it claims, is a literary and astrological hybrid, nurtured by political forces and opportunists. Part I was influenced by the work of Acharya S.[4]

Part II alleges that the September 11 attacks were either orchestrated or allowed to happen by elements within the United States government in order to generate mass fear, justify the War on Terror, provide a pretext for the curtailment of civil liberties, and produce economic gain. It asserts that the U.S. government had advance knowledge of the attacks, that the military deliberately allowed the planes to reach their targets, and that World Trade Center buildings 1, 2, and 7 underwent a controlled demolition.

Part III states that the Federal Reserve System is controlled by a small cabal of international bankers who conspire to create global calamities to enrich themselves.[2] Three wars involving the United States during the twentieth century are highlighted as part of this alleged agenda, started by specifically engineered events, including the sinking of the RMS Lusitania, the attack on Pearl Harbor, and the Gulf of Tonkin Incident. The film asserts that such wars serve to sustain conflict in general and force the U.S. government to borrow money, thereby increasing the profits of the international bankers. The film also claims that the Federal Income Tax is illegal.

Part III also alleges a secret agreement to merge the United States, Canada and Mexico into a North American Union as a step toward the creation of a single world government. The film speculates that under such a government, every human could be implanted with an RFID chip to monitor individual activity and suppress dissent.

The first film received almost universal condemnation from the media, though it also "attracted massive interest" from the public.[3][5]

The newspaper The Arizona Republic described Zeitgeist: The Movie as "a bramble of conspiracy theories involving Sept. 11, the international monetary system, and Christianity" saying also that the movie trailer states that "there are people guiding your life and you don't even know it".[6]

A review in The Irish Times wrote that "these are surreal perversions of genuine issues and debates, and they tarnish all criticism of faith, the Bush administration, and globalizationthere are more than enough factual injustices in this world to be going around without having to invent fictional ones".[5]

Ivor Tossell in The Globe and Mail cited it as an example of how modern conspiracy theories are promulgated, though he praised its effectiveness:

The film is an interesting object lesson on how conspiracy theories get to be so popular ... It's a driven, if uneven, piece of propaganda, a marvel of tight editing and fuzzy thinking. Its on-camera sources are mostly conspiracy theorists, co-mingled with selective eyewitness accounts, drawn from archival footage and often taken out of context. It derides the media as a pawn of the International Bankers, but produces media reports for credibility when convenient. The film ignores expert opinion, except the handful of experts who agree with it. And yet, it's compelling. It shamelessly ploughs forward, connecting dots with an earnest certainty that makes you want to give it an A for effort.[2]

Filipe Feio, reflecting upon the film's Internet popularity in Dirio de Notcias, stated that "[f]iction or not, Zeitgeist: The Movie threatens to become the champion of conspiracy theories of today".[7]

Michael Shermer, founder of the Skeptics Society, mentioned Zeitgeist in an article in Scientific American on skepticism in the age of mass media and the postmodern belief in the relativism of truth. He argues that this belief, coupled with a "clicker culture of mass media," results in a multitude of various truth claims packaged in "infotainment units", in the form of films such as Zeitgeist and Loose Change.[8]

Jane Chapman, a film producer and reader in media studies at the University of Lincoln, called Zeitgeist "a fast-paced assemblage of agitprop," an example of "unethical film-making".[9] Chapman accused Peter Joseph of "implicit deception" through the use of standard film-making propaganda techniques. While parts of the film are, she says, "comically" self-defeating, the nature of "twisted evidence" and use of Madrid bomb footage to imply it is of the London bombings amount to "ethical abuse in sourcing". She finishes her analysis with the comment: "Thus, legitimate questions about what happened on 9/11, and about corruption in religious and financial organizations, are all undermined by the film's determined effort to maximize an emotional response at the expense of reasoned argument."

Alex Jones, American radio host, conspiracy theorist and executive producer of Loose Change, stated that film segments of Zeitgeist are taken directly from his documentary Terrorstorm, and that he supports "90 percent" of the film.[10]

Skeptic magazine's Tim Callahan, criticizing the parts of the film on the origins of Christianity, wrote that "some of what it asserts is true. Unfortunately, this material is liberallyand sloppilymixed with material that is only partially true and much that is plainly and simply bogus."[11]

Chris Forbes, Senior lecturer in Ancient History of Macquarie University and member of the Synod of the Diocese of Sydney, severely criticized Part I of the film, stating that it has no basis in serious scholarship or ancient sources, and that it relies on amateur sources that recycle frivolous ideas from one another, commenting that "[i]t is extraordinary how many claims it makes which are simply not true".[12] Similar conclusions were reached by Dr. Mark Foreman of Liberty University.[13]

In Tablet magazine, journalist Michelle Goldberg criticized Zeitgeist: The Movie as being "steeped in far-right, isolationist, and covertly anti-Semitic conspiracy theories," writing that the film borrowed from the work of Eustace Mullins, Lyndon LaRouche, and radio host Alex Jones, and that it portrays a cabal of international bankers purportedly ruling the world.[3] In an interview with TheMarker, Joseph said that while the film does mention bankers it does not seek to blame any individual or group of individuals. He argued they are merely a product of a socioeconomic system in need of change.[14]

Chip Berlet wrote that the 9/11 conspiracy theories "are bait used to attract viewers from the 9/11 Truth movement and others who embrace conspiracist thinking to the idiosyncratic antireligion views of the videographer and the world of right-wing antisemitic theories of a global banking conspiracy".[15]

Jay Kinney questioned the accuracy of its claims and the quality of its arguments, describing it as agitprop and propaganda.[16] At times, according to Kinney, "Zeitgeist engages in willful confusion by showing TV screen shots of network or cable news with voice-overs from unidentified people not associated with the news programs. If one weren't paying close attention, the effect would be to confer the status and authority of TV news upon the words being spoken. Even when quotes or sound bites are attributed to a source, there's no way to tell if they are quoted correctly or in context."[16]

In June 2013, Peter Joseph directed the music video for "God Is Dead?" by Black Sabbath, using extensive imagery from Zeitgeist: The Movie and its sequels.[17]

Release date

Running time

Zeitgeist: Addendum is a 2008 film produced and directed by Peter Joseph, and is a sequel to the 2007 film, Zeitgeist: The Movie. It premiered at the 5th Annual Artivist Film Festival in Los Angeles, California on October 2, 2008.[citation needed]

The film begins and ends with excerpts from a speech by Jiddu Krishnamurti. The remainder of the film is narrated by Peter Joseph and divided into four parts, which are prefaced by on-screen quotations from Krishnamurti, John Adams, Bernard Lietaer, and Thomas Paine, respectively.

Part I covers the process of fractional-reserve banking as illustrated in Modern Money Mechanics, by the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago. The film suggests that society is manipulated into economic slavery through debt-based monetary policies by requiring individuals to submit for employment in order to pay off their debt.

Part II has an interview with John Perkins, author of Confessions of an Economic Hitman, who says he was involved in the subjugation of Latin American economies by multinational corporations and the United States government, including involvement in the overthrow of Latin American heads-of-state. Perkins sees the US as a corporatocracy, in which maximization of profits is the first priority.

Part III introduces futurist Jacque Fresco and The Venus Project and asserts a need to move away from current socioeconomic paradigms. Fresco states that capitalism perpetuates the conditions it claims to address, as problems are only solved if there is money to be made. The film looks at Fresco's proposal of a resource-based economy, which puts environmental friendliness, sustainability and abundance as fundamental societal goals. He goes on to discuss technology which he sees as the primary driver of human advancement, and he describes politics as being unable to solve any problems.

Part IV suggests that the primary reason for what the film sees as society's social values ("warfare, corruption, oppressive laws, social stratification, irrelevant superstitions, environmental destruction, and a despotic, socially indifferent, profit oriented ruling class") is a collective ignorance of "the emergent and symbiotic aspects of natural law". The film advocates the following actions for achieving social change: boycotting of the most powerful banks in the Federal Reserve System, the major news networks, the military, energy corporations, all political systems; and joining, and supporting The Zeitgeist Movement.

Zeitgeist: Addendum won the 2008 Artivist Film Festival's award for best feature ("Artivist Spirit" category).[18]

Originally, the film was uploaded-released on Google Video. The current video posting on YouTube surpassed 5 million views by late 2013.[19]

Alan Feuer of The New York Times noted that while the first film was famous for alleging that the attacks of September 11 were an inside job, the second, "was all but empty of such conspiratorial notions, directing its rhetoric and high production values toward posing a replacement for the evils of the banking system and a perilous economy of scarcity and debt".[20]

Zeitgeist: Moving Forward is the third installment in Peter Joseph's Zeitgeist film series. The film premiered at the JACC Theater in Los Angeles on January 15, 2011 at the Artivist Film Festival,[21] was released in theaters and online. As of November 2014, the film had over 23 million views on YouTube. The film is arranged in four parts, each containing interviews, narration and animated sequences.[22]

Release date

Running time

The film begins with an animated sequence narrated by Jacque Fresco. He describes his adolescent life and his discontinuation of public education at the age of 14 and describes his early life influences.

Part I: Human Nature

Human behavior and the nature vs. nurture debate is discussed, which Robert Sapolsky refers to as a "false dichotomy." Disease, criminal activity, and addictions are also discussed. The overall conclusion of Part I is that social environment and cultural conditioning play a large part in shaping human behavior.

Part II: Social Pathology

John Locke and Adam Smith are discussed in regard to modern economics. The film critically questions the economic need for private property, money, and the inherent inequality between agents in the system. Also seen critically is the need for cyclical consumption in order to maintain market share, resulting in wasted resources and planned obsolescence. According to the movie, the current monetary system will result in default or hyperinflation at some future time.

Part III: Project Earth

As with Zeitgeist: Addendum, the film presents a "resource-based economy" as advocated by Jacque Fresco discussing how human civilization could start from a new beginning in relation to resource types, locations, quantities, to satisfy human demands; track the consumption and depletion of resources to regulate human demands and maintain the condition of the environment.

Part IV: Rise

The current worldwide situation is described as disastrous. A case is presented that pollution, deforestation, climate change, overpopulation, and warfare are all created and perpetuated by the socioeconomic system. Various poverty statistics are shown that suggest a progressive worsening of world culture.

The final scene of the film shows a partial view of earth from space, followed by a sequence of superimposed statements; "This is your world", "This is our world", and "The revolution is now".

List of Interviewees

Zeitgeist: Moving Forward received "Best Political Documentary" in 2011 from the Action on Film International Film Festival.[23]

A The Socialist Standard review said the film's use of animation and humour gave it a "well rounded feel", though it criticized the "shaky economic analysis" in the second part of the film, saying "Karl Marx had already undertaken a more scientific analysis", adding, "the analysis is at least on the right track". Regarding transition to the new system proposed in the film, the reviewer noted "there is no mention of how to get from here to there".[24]

In an article, in Tablet magazine, Michelle Goldberg described the film as "silly enough that at times [she] suspected it was [a] sly satire about new-age techno-utopianism instead of an example of it".[3] She describes the 3 Zeitgeist movies as "a series of 3 apocalyptic cult documentaries.[3]

Zeitgeist: The Movie (2007) started the chain of events leading to the formation of the Zeitgeist movement.[3] The group advocates transition from the global money-based economic system to a post-scarcity economy or resource-based economy. VC Reporter's Shane Cohn summarized the movement's charter as: "Our greatest social problems are the direct results of our economic system".[25] Joseph created a political movement that, according to The Daily Telegraph, dismisses historic religious concepts as misleading and embraces a version of sustainable ecological concepts and scientific administration of society.[26] The group describes the current socioeconomic system as structurally corrupt and inefficient in the use of resources.[20][27] Michelle Goldberg described the Zeitgeist movement as "the first Internet-based apocalyptic cult".[3]

Links to related articles

View original post here:

Zeitgeist (film series) - Wikipedia

Top Five Zeitgeist: The Movie Myths! – Peter Joseph

Top Five Zeitgeist The Movie Myths!

1) The Zeitgeist Movement is all about support of Zeitgeist: The Movie!

Actually, as per my experience over the past 6 years, most within The Zeitgeist Movement (TZM) do not subscribe or agree with this film in general, although mixed reactions are most common. Zeitgeist: The Movie was created years before TZM was formed. TZM was created originally to support Jacque Frescos Venus Project (TVP). After TVP and TZM split three years later, TZM became a self-propelling institution with its own body of work. The text The Zeitgeist Movement Defined is the core source of Movement interests and expresses what TZM is about clearly.

As of 2015, any ongoing association with TZM and Zeitgeist: The Movie is often perpetuated by those merely with malicious intent. As the rest of this list will express, Zeitgeist: The Movie has been a point of extreme attack and bigoted reactions since its inception. Having been seen by literally hundreds of millions of people, it is no surprise so many in vehement disagreement rise to the top. I wish I counted the number of death threats and the amount of cyber stalking I have personally endured. I have spent upwards of $20,000 in legal fees fighting constant defamation by those offended by that film.

As an aside, many have suggested that a simple name change (remove Zeitgeist) would have solved the problem. Yet, if a name change alone is that persuasive, isnt that actually indicative of a deep lack of critical thought? Where a mere superficial title changes peoples sense of association? I find this troubling if so. But regardless, the genie cannot go back in the bottle. Love it or hate it, Zeitgeist: The Movie isnt going anywhere and its content/implications 8 years later seem to only get stronger and more validated. According to my online distributor, it is one of the most popular docs on Netflix, now in many languages/regions there.

2) Its all been debunked!

The term debunked has become a mantra of sorts by the anti-ztm crowd. You also see this kind of overly zealous absolutism in other communities as well, such as the atheist community. As an atheist myself, I have learned that compassion is much more powerful than ridicule and if the goal of any communication is to change minds, taking a condescending and absolute approach does nothing but inflate the initiators ego not help educate others.

In that, many interpreted the first section of Zeitgeist: The Movie as an attack on religion. I would say it is providing a contrary view of its history and it does so in a non-derisive way. It is very academic in its presentation and to call it an attack is without merit.

That noted, Zeitgeist: The Movie was an art piece first and foremost and a great deal of liberty was taken in its expression. In the very first edition, I had a section with John F. Kennedy talking about the grand conspiracy of Communism and overlaid it onto his assassination footage. I knew what I was doing and did so because it was an amazing artistic effect. It wasnt until the film was grossly misinterpreted in its mixed genre style and artistic license that I later went back and made such editorial changes to conform it to a more documentary form.

I was sad to have to do this, in fact but It seems it was too advanced a piece for common culture and people were not ready to be critical of such liberties; understand the context. Zeitgeist: The Movie was the ultimate expression of demanding critical thought. It wasnt made to declare, it was made to challenge.Same goes for the long held up cry of manipulative filmmaking, such as when footage of the Madrid subway bombing was used to introduce a section on the 7/7 London Bombings. How dare I show a different explosion!

In 2010, I cleaned it up to conform to a more traditional documentary form and produced a free 220 booklet to support the literally 100s of claims made in the work. To date, no one has addressed this text. I would also add that while points made in the film from the origins of religion, to the events of Sept 11th, to the history of war for profit and social manipulation by financial interests are subject to interpretation and could perhaps be wrong, no single opposing claim or group of contradictions debunks the whole film. As the filmmaker, I will state that even I am not sure about some of the claims as far as what the absolute truth is. But again, that isnt the purpose of this work.

3) There are no sources!

I have seen this claim posted in reviews constantly. Zeitgeist: The Movie is likely the most sourced film in documentary history. I know of no other work that has painstakingly shown where the content came from. Again, one can argue about the truth of any given idea, but to say it is made up is beyond absurd.Companion Source Guide : http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/Zeitgeist,%20The%20Movie-%20Companion%20Guide%20PDF.pdf

4) Its anti-semitic!

This one really took me by surprise when I starting hear about it, especially since I end the film with one of the most heart warming/human unity quotes of all time by Carl Sagan. It appears to have started with a woman named Michelle Goldberg. She essentially stated that my use of a 1941 anti-war speech by Charles A. Lindbergh implied this, as Lindbergh was supposedly anti-semitic.

In the opening section of part 3 of the film, she claims Charles A. Lindbergh was talking about the jews when describing warring interests trying to bring American into WWII. This is just about as wrong and irresponsible as it comes. Sadly, this theme has carried forward through history as the echo of pro-war/pro establishment media propaganda redefines reality. Long story short, Charles A Lindbergh was a famous American aviator, author, inventor, explorer, and social activist. He was the son of Congressman Charles Lindbergh Sr. who was extremely outspoken against the banking system a generation prior, writing texts on the Money Trust, referring to the financial system and its power. (He too was often called anti-semitic with no validation as a means of personal attack.) Charles A. Lindbergh deeply opposed US involve in WWII. He was an isolationist. In this crusade, he was attacked as anti-semitic in order to pollute his message. (sound familiar?) Its that simple. To his discredit, his speaking skills were poor and he often spoke primitively about groups. He held some bad science views that were very common of the time and its easy to look back on such un-informed issues and find false relationships. Yet, his non-racist stance is very clear to those paying attention.

For example, he once stated: I am not attacking either the Jewish or the British people. Both races, I admire. But I am saying that the leaders of both the British and the Jewish races, for reasons which are as understandable from their viewpoint as they are inadvisable from ours, for reasons which are not American, wish to involve us in the war. We cannot blame them for looking out for what they believe to be their own interests, but we also must look out for ours. We cannot allow the natural passions and prejudices of other peoples to lead our country to destructionThis was a political statement, not a racist one but the press at the time ran that it was anti-semitic, which, again, is a good ploy if you want people to distrust someone. We see this technique being used today, constantly. Here are the last lines of the speech used in Zeitgeist: The Movie (that was called anti-semitic), along with the next sentence, not included in the film (in bold):

Our theaters soon became filled with plays portraying the glory of war. Newsreels lost all semblance of objectivity. Newspapers and magazines began to lose advertising if they carried anti-war articles. A smear campaign was instituted against individuals who opposed intervention. The terms fifth columnist, traitor, Nazi, anti-Semitic were thrown ceaselessly at any one who dared to suggest that it was not to the best interests of the United States to enter the war. Men lost their jobs if they were frankly anti-war. Many others dared no longer speak.

Later in the speech he then states: No person with a sense of the dignity of mankind can condone the persecution of the Jewish race in Germany.

Does this sound like a racist to you? In a book written by his wife, she states: His prewar isolationist speeches were given in all sincerity for what he thought was the good of the country and the worldHe was accused of being anti-semetic, but in the 45 years I lived with him I never heard him make a remark against the jews, not a crack or joke, and neither did any of our children.So what we have is a victim of the media culture, glamorized through history with the vile horror of hindsight given the horrors/persecutions around WWII. Lindbergh might not have been the smartest and most strategic in his manner of activism and communication but there is no evidence he was a racist.

5) Its an anti-New World Order Conspiracy Film!

Proponents who talk about the New World Order, (long before Zeitgeist The Movie) have always agitated me. I have never supported this bizarre and esoteric body of assumptions and, to this day, can honestly say I have no idea how the current ideas even came about given the origin of the original term. New World Order is a term put forward by H. G. Wells in his book of the same title. In this, he speaks about the world unifying as one for the better. Since that time, however, the term has been skyrocketed into bizarro land.The only times I have ever sympathized with anyone who does have this pop culture belief was when I tried and get behind it and talk about root causes of human behavior and power abuse. And yet, even the current Wikipedia entry on Zeitgeist: The Movie says it is about New World Order forces But then again its Wikipedia the encyclopedia that lets random opinion and select news sources serve as historical fact.

Anyway, while the very original version of the film did talk about global government run by corporate power as an Orwellian 1984 type assumption for the future, this was artistically presented and deduced as a result of global financial power and the tendency to constantly concentrate this power. I later removed this section entirely (in 2010) as I was disgusted by the constant misinterpretations.

Likewise, the notion of a Conspiracy film is equally as misguided. This is simply derision by categorical association. No different than how the term communist was used to force people to shy away from any information or ideas that were against the status quo during the Mcarthy Era in the 1950s.

Zeitgeist: The Movie takes three subjects and bridges them within the context of social myth. This context is then evidenced to show how people become biased and can be manipulated based upon those dominant shared (bogus) beliefs (hence the term zeitgeist itself).

In the context of the real world, power abuse is obvious since the nature of our economy supports massive class division and the movement of power and money to a small group. This isnt conspiracy it is a system reality. We live in a war system and massive gaming for personal/group self-interest is happening at every moment.

Thats enough for now.

~Peter Joseph, Feb 22nd 2015

More here:

Top Five Zeitgeist: The Movie Myths! - Peter Joseph

The Zeitgeist Movement – Wikipedia

Movement that emerged from the Zeitgeist movie series

The Zeitgeist Movement is an activist movement established in the United States in 2008 by Peter Joseph. The group is critical of market capitalism, describing it as structurally corrupt and wasteful of resources. According to The Daily Telegraph, the group dismisses historic religious concepts as misleading, and embraces sustainable ecology and scientific administration of society.[1][2][3][4] VC Reporter's Shane Cohn summarized the movement's charter as: "Our greatest social problems are the direct results of our economic system".[5]

An article in the Journal of Contemporary Religion describes the movement as an example of a "conspirituality", a synthesis of New Age spirituality and conspiracy theory.[6]

Michelle Goldberg of Tablet Magazine called the movement "the world's first Internet-based apocalyptic cult, with members who parrot the party line with cheerful, rote fidelity."[7] In her opinion, the movement is "devoted to a kind of sci-fi planetary communism", and the 2007 documentary that "sparked" the movement was "steeped in far-right, isolationist, and covertly anti-Semitic conspiracy theories."[7]

Alan Feuer of The New York Times said the movement was like "a utopian presentation of a money-free and computer-driven vision of the future, a wholesale reimagination of civilization, as if Karl Marx and Carl Sagan had hired John Lennon from his "Imagine" days to do no less than redesign the underlying structures of planetary life."[8]

The Zeitgeist Movement was formed in 2008 by Joseph shortly after the late 2008 release of Zeitgeist: Addendum, the second film in the Zeitgeist film series.[9][10]

Zeitgeist was first linked to the Venus Project. In April 2011, partnership between the two groups ended in an apparent power struggle, with Joseph commenting, "Without [the Zeitgeist Movement], [the Venus Project] doesnt exist it has nothing but ideas and has no viable method to bring it to light."[9]

The first Zeitgeist documentary which predates the organization Zeitgeist movement, borrowed from the works of Eustace Mullins, Lyndon LaRouche, and radio host Alex Jones.[7] Much of its footage was taken directly from Alex Jones documentaries.[7]

The group holds an annual event, Z-Day (or Zeitgeist Day), an "educational forum" held in March. The New York Times reported on the second Z-Day held at Manhattan Community College in New York in 2009 which included lectures by Peter Joseph and Jacque Fresco.[8] This event sold out with 900 people paying $10 each to attend. The event's organizers said that 450 connected events in 70 countries around the globe also took place.[8]

More here:

The Zeitgeist Movement - Wikipedia

The Zeitgeist Movement UK

Reserve your free ticket here: https://zdaylondon2019.eventbrite.co.uk The Zeitgeist Movement is a global sustainability advocacy group working through education & explicitly non-violent means to bring the world together for the common goal of human and environmental sustainability. Please join us in London to hear us & as always Z-Day gives members the opportunity to socialise, make []

Read More

The Zeitgeist Movement is a global sustainability advocacy group working through education & explicitly non-violent means to bring the world together for the common goal of human and environmental sustainability. Please join us in London to hear us & as always Z-Day gives members the opportunity to socialise, make new friends, discuss & hopefully put []

Read More

Zeitgeist Day, or Zday for short is an annual global educational symposium that works to amplify a context upon which existing/emerging scientific findings may find a concerted social imperative aiming to create a more truly responsible, sustainable, peaceful, global society. This years theme in London is based heavily on activism, what a person can set []

Read More

Hi everybody! Count down to ZDAY London 2016. Have a look at the program for the day. Theres still tickets available, so make sure you have got them as soon as possible, if youd like to guarantee your seat. Click on program image to zoom in, please. TICKETS here:https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/z-day-london-2016-tickets-21680330452 Thank you! And see you on []

Read More

Were glad to announce that Barb Jacobson from Basic Income UK will be speaking! She has been active in community organising since 1982, a co-ordinator of Basic Income UK and on the board of Unconditional Basic Income Europe, a network of organisations and activists in 25 countries. Basic Income UK is a collective promoting unconditional []

Read More

See the original post here:

The Zeitgeist Movement UK

The Zeitgeist Movement Australian Chapter

DAY ONE

Zeitgeist Movement supporters started pouring in from chapters all around the world as the doors opened to the very appropriately named New Globe Theatre in Brisbane, Australia, Saturday morning on the last weekend of March.

Organisers scurried excitedly, setting up the various areas, including: the merchandise space; the questions for PJ booth; the vegan food buffet; the bar; the workshop space, scattered with comfy chairs and recommended readings; and of course, the main stage, where presentations would be continuously running over the first two-day Z-Day main event.

Check out this great overview of Z-Day Day One by one of the very talented New Zealand coordinators, Wiri Te Moni.

The volunteer technicians, and chapter coordinators Jason Lord from LA and Michael Kubler from Adelaide, worked tirelessly, making sure we had quality recordings of each presentation for later viewing on the TZMGlobal YouTube Channel. Audience members got comfortably acquainted and seated. (Links to presentation recordings will be added to this post as they are uploaded.)

Photos by Michael Kubler @kublermdk, Renee McKeown, and Jason Lord

As soon as everything was ready to go, Z-Day Global kicked off, starting with my opening presentation, where I spoke about the theme of this years Z-Day: Towards Global Unity and Abundance, as well as advice on creating a sustainable and successful chapter, the amount of work involved in making Z-Day happen, ways to avoid economic bigotry, and concluding with a certain framing of encouraging a unified quest to understand the nature of reality rather than personal ambition to win over your perceived opponents.

Casey Davidson, Australian National Coordinator

This was followed by the very knowledgeable and insightful Franky Mller, National Coordinator of the German chapter. Franky shared TZM Understandings important information about The Zeitgeist Movement, refreshing our minds and filling in important gaps in knowledge for those still learning about the tenets and train-of-thought.

Franky Mller, German National Coordinator

See Frankys presentation here.

After Franky, the second of our presenters, Cameron Reilly entertained the crowd with a tongue-in-cheek questionnaire asking the audience about their own psychopathic tendencies and giving them the opportunity to measure it according to their results. He talked about the specific traits of psychopaths, touching on the idea that people who fit into this personality type are not changeable and will always be born. Additionally, the system we have created actually encourages people with these tendencies to acquire positions of power, hence the title of his presentation, the Psychopath Economy.

Simultaneously, we had set up a workshop space in the adjacent room for Z-Day participants who were more interested in being involved in activities and discussions. The first of these workshops came from Caroline Rentel, author and activist, who shared ideas about a relatively new writing genre, Solarpunk, basically based in a future society beyond scarcity and hierarchy, where humanity, nature and technology are integrated.

Caroline Rentel, Solarpunk author

Caroline and Camerons presentations lead into lunch time, where a selection of delicious vegan foods were provided as part of the Z-Day ticket. Curries, cakes, sushi, burgers and snacks were available for all participants served on eco-friendly plates with serviettes and cutlery. Thanks to the lead food volunteer coordinator, Vicky Syme and everyone else who worked so hard to make food available for everyone. For future Z-Day organisers, I would suggest that having food available at the venue is very important in keeping the audience members together to collaborate and be on time for the presentation straight after lunch.

Vegan chefs Vicki and Margarita

Lunch time!

Our first presentation after lunch came from Rich Penney, who we flew in from Toronto, Canada. Rich has attended several Z-Days as one of the most intruiging and informed presenters within the Movement. This year he shared the very clear Contradictions of Capitalism, in a way that allowed us some insight into Richs life living with disability, as well as intellectual gifts that cant be easily monetised in this society. This is a fantastic introductory presentation to help people understand the core problems of the way we have structured society.

We were next graced with the presence of two of the very talented guys from acclaimed Aussie band, Dead Letter Circus, Kim Benzie and Luke Williams. As I have personally been a long-time fan of DLC with their unique sound, emotionally evoking and incredibly conscious lyrics which fall in line beautifully with the tenets of the Zeitgeist Movement, it was amazingly awe-inspiring to hear Luke and Kim talk about their personal experience and journey as artists against oppression. The uplifting conclusion of their presentation of their song While You Wait, together with lyrics and the comically-titled anti-establishment drum solo moved the audience to a standing ovation.

Luke Williams, Dead Letter Circus Drummer

Kim Benzie, Dead Letter Circus Vocalist, Z-Day 2017

While these presentations were going on, Oliver Koslik from Canada presented interactively in the workshop space on Emotional Suppression: A short course on how to recognise and deal with gas-lighting/ambient abuse.

Oliver Koslik

The fun continued on the main stage as we introduced the next of our international guests, Euvie Ivanova from the Future Thinkers Podcast. As a co-host of the Future Thinkers Podcast, Euvie promotes technology, science and consciousness for social concern.

Here is a quick overview of the premise of the Future Thinkers Podcast.

Euvies presentation was particularly focused on consciousness development, as she spoke pragmatically about ways in which we can explore our consciousness using methods from a variety of doctrines. This was particularly interesting to the audience as something that hasnt been discussed in detail in regards to TZM.

Euvie Ivanova Future Thinkers Z-Day

The other half of the Future Thinkers Podcast, Mike Gilliland, followed Euvies presentation. Mike shared his thoughts on the potential of blockchain technology, beyond the limitations of bitcoin. Topics such as decentralisation, security and developing intelligent management systems were explored.

Mike Gilliland from Future Thinkers at Z-Day 2017

During Euvie and Mikes presentations, the Melbourne chapter coordinators Brad Cini and Sonny Vice sat with an intrigued group in the workshop space as they spoke about their upcoming Zero Waste/Minimalisation project they are in the process of creating, and hopefully recreating in cities outside of Melbourne.

Sonny Vice and Brad Cini from the Melbourne Chapter

Everyone was ready for another break to debrief and snack, before moving into the final presentation of the day from ex-Italian coordinator and futurist author Federico Pistono. Federico presented Ethics of Technology, sharing an alternative look at the worlds state of affairs, suggesting ways in which technology is already shifting humanity forward, and new ethical considerations that need to be taken into account regarding this. He shared some controversial topics for discussion that lead into his concluding statement about exponential empathy.

Federico Pistono at Z-Day 2017 Brisbane Australia

Just before the panel, Gilbert Ismail shared a brief update on the global chapters administration and new website. Mark Enoch shared his method for marketing the RBE message in the workshop space, followed by Matt Peddie and Vera L Te Velte from the CryptoParty who showed audience members ways to make their devices more secure.

After all the presentations, I was fortunate enough to lead the Day One Panel, where audience members had the opportunity to ask the speakers questions from the first days presentations on the main stage. This included a lively discussion where panellists authentically shared their thoughts on activism within TZM, as well as a range of social, economic and environmental concerns and ideas for consideration.

Panel from left:Casey Davidson, Franky Muller, Rich Penney, Luke Williams, Kim Benzie, Euvie Ivanova, Mike Gilliland, Federico Pistono, Gilbert Ismail

Day One Z-Day 2017 Panel At front: Casey Davidson Back from left: Franky Muller, Rich Penny, Luke Williams, Kim Benzie

Z-Day 2017 in Brisbane was the first Global event to have presentations as well as workshops. It was also the first with evening performances. A big thanks to the beautiful Anita Diamond for MCing and organising the evenings performances. Roger Smith shared his spontaneous outbreaks of reason, with his passionate funk/blues/rock sound, bringing urgency to the message of the Zeitgeist Movement. This was followed by other local artists including Aceso and The Duke. The evening was complete with DJ SAMARI, coming in from Auckland, New Zealand who shared his Zeitgeist Anaglyph.

Aceso

DAY TWO

Enthusiastic minds entered the New Globe Theatre for the second and final day of the Z-Day weekend with presentation and Q & A from Zeitgeist Movement founder and Zeitgeist film creator Peter Joseph. For a quick overview of the second day, check out Wiris vlog below.

Californian coordinator Jason Lord, kicked off Day 2 with his presentation, Defining Root Causes a short tour through common surface associations where people fall victim to seeing persistent problems as individual outcomes that need fighting or resisting. Jasons presentation explored how to see these problems as symptoms pointing to a systemic problem and helping people see how the system view can help shape your actions when it comes to activism and discussion with peers.

Jason Lord, California TZM Coordinator

Jason then introduced Peter Joseph, TZM Founder, who started with his concise presentation titled Train of Thought before delving into questions I took from the PJ booth and the audience. Just some of the topics discussed include adapting to natural laws, the victims of our structure particularly our social system, human nature, white imperial self indulgence, biodiversity, how every life support system is in decline, abundance producing mechanism, corporations, techno-capitalist apologists, structural violence, discussion about the Interreflections trailer, managing the Movement and its role in activism, philanthropy and consciousness.

Watch Peters Q & A in the video below.

After Peter, the audience once again enjoyed a delicious vegan lunch, before coming back for the final presentations, which were focused around the fight and the build towards the Zeitgeist Movements ultimate vision of a Resource-Based Economy (RBE). Richard Ostmason of the Money Free Party New Zealand, shared the work he has been doing within the political establishment to engage people into thinking about the potential of actually seeing an RBE in the short-term, particularly in New Zealand.

Richard Ostmason, Money Free Party NZ, presenting at Z-Day 2017

Next, Adelaide coordinator, Michael Kublers presented about the Price of Zero Transition, making a very important point that we cant wait for collapse and then expect to grow the world we want to see out of the ashes (coined the Phoenix Model). Rather, we need to start making systemic changes now in a variety of ways if we truly want to see an RBE.

Michael Kubler presenting at Z-Day 2017

This was followed by Ziggy Tolnay of the Sydney chapter, who shared a concept called the RBE10K project, about creating a physical community in which people could participate in as a transitionary method towards a global RBE.

Ziggy Tolnay presenting at Z-Day 2017

By this stage, the crowd was growing exceedingly weary after two full days of learning and sharing, but were very fortunate to be jolted back to the present with the very talented and insightful Eleanor Goldfield, with her emotionally evoking and painfully accurate spoken word performance about capitalism and activism. This was followed by her presentation, which rounded up the whole two days worth of events as she shared her very honest and authentic thoughts on the importance of the fight and the build that needs to happen as we work towards a post-capitalist society, making clear that capitalism will die, but whether we die with it is up to us.

Eleanor Goldfield performing and presenting at Z-Day 2017 Brisbane Australia

Eleanor Goldfield performing and presenting at Z-Day 2017 Brisbane Australia

Eleanor Goldfield performing and presenting at Z-Day 2017 Brisbane Australia

During the main stage presentations, a generous portion of the audience had made their way into the workshop space to engage with a very interesting and important presentation with one of the most experienced, thoughtful and knowledgeable ethics and systems designers, Richard Mochelle. Richard shared his thoughts on a tangible way to acquire land for a Resource-Based Economy, outside of the current methods of land acquirement, which requires submission to the current economic paradigm. Richard suggested that this land could be acquired through creating an RBE trust, in which baby boomers ultimately give their land to a cause in which promises are made to care for their land and not sell it back to the banks.

Richard Mochelle and Casey Davidson

The audience had another quick break before joining us again for the final panel with Day 2 presenters, including Peter Joseph. A range of topics were once again discussed including UBI, as well as other concerns and questions regarding transition.

Day 2 Panel Z-Day 2017

Id like to put out a big thanks to Vince and JV, who have attended every Z-Day Global since its incarnation, and have worked on the door every year, providing a significant help to coordinators, including myself.

JV and Vince Z-Day 2017 Brisbane Australia

A big thanks also to my wonderful local chapter team who managed the merchandise stand, who helped set up and pack up the venue, who managed the workshop space, and generally made everything run smoothly. Particularly to James Pauly, Karl Hansen and Lara Jordan. Thanks also to the New Globe Theatre for providing the wonderful space.

James Pauly

TZM Merchandise

Thanks also to the lovely vegan activists who spent two full-days at the event sharing their knowledge about the environmental and personal benefits of a direct active change Zeitgeist Movement advocates can make towards ethical consumer choices, including a vegan lifestyle.

Vegan Stall at Z-Day 2017

Thank you also to all of the other people behind the scene who found the power within yourself to volunteer your time and energy and provide assistance without any expectation of personal gain, but purely for the message of TZM. This includes those who lent and donated needed funding, anyone who bought a ticket, anyone who was offered a free ticket due to your circumstances, anyone who asked a question, participated in any way, who offered an idea, a question, who bought merchandise or a drink, who offered their assistance in any way shape or form, or even sat passively as an audience member. Bums on seats count, and matter particularly to organisers, presenters and performers. Thanks also to our global online audience who made a weekend of it by participating in the online streaming from afar.

Paul Doyle from Frequencies TV Life Streaming for ZDay Global Brisbane

Another big thanks to Jason Lord, Michael Kubler and Paul Doyle who made sure the video content including streaming and videos for later viewing would be available to our global audience who couldnt make the big trip to Brisbane. This is a significantly huge job and anyone with technical skills is always encouraged to help in this regard to make sure our content reaches a larger audience and forever into the future.

Jason making sure everything is running smoothly

Michael Kubler, usually behind the camera

Id also like to extend my gratitudeto all of the other people behind the scene who found the power within yourself to volunteer your time and energy and provide assistance without any expectation of personal gain, but purely for the message of TZM.

Z-Day 2017 Group Photo

Z-Day 2017 Setting up for Group Photo

A special mention to Zac Syme for your support as well as opening your home for the presenter social night and providing a home for so many people leading up to, and over the event. Thanks to others who opened their home to travelling guests, including Simon Cole, Caroline and Karl, Ricky, Grant, Anita and Tim, James, Lara and Jack.

Zac Syme, Queensland TZM Coordinator and Federico Pistono, Author, ex-Italian Coordinator Photos by Michael Kubler

Thanks again to Paul Doyle for offering your studio Frequencies TV where we recorded podcasts with coordinators and the Future Thinkers Podcast hosts Mike and Euvie, as well as for the public social night on Friday night before the event. More photos of the Pre-Z-Day Party here.

2017-03-24th Pre ZDay global public event at Frequencies TV, Brisbane Photos by Michael Kubler @kublermdk

Regardless of how far the Movement may or may not have come, we still have significant momentum, and your support however much or little you can give makes a differences to our ability to spread the message. Im eternally grateful for all of the support and truly believe with the mindset of the participants in this years Z-Day we can make the drastic change we need to see to truly create a unified, abundant world.

More photos by Michael Kubler and others here.

Peter Joseph (TZM Founder) and Casey Davidson (TZM Australia Coordinator)Article by Casey Davidson

View post:

The Zeitgeist Movement Australian Chapter


12345...1020...