The Zeitgeist Movement is *Pure Communism*

page: 1
10
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 13 2010 @ 04:43 AM
link   
If you are something through and through yet completely deny it to all extremes it seriously calls into question your motives.

The founders and official materials of this movement explicitly claim to be different from Communism, yet their items of reference lead to...

Blatent Lies:

How does The Venus Project compare with Communism?
Communism used money and labor, had social stratification, and elected officials to maintain the communists' traditions. LINK


*The reality of the "money" is that they were units of measurement, like what they call "credits" in dystopian scifi films. The Zeitgeist crowd seem to be unable to explain a concrete model of how it will lack any forms of units of measurement of value or resources. In being unable to do so this is a total pipedream as this couldn't be more critical in the entire idea of it all.

*The key premise of communism is the end of social classes (social stratificiation). There is absolutely no debate here, unless of course you don't know anything about communism. This is an outrageous lie!

*The only one that's 'shaky' is the bit about elected offficials. My asnwer to this issue also applies to the issue of "labor". Under ZP, a total machine takeover which they promote would make this statement 'true'. Nevermind that the technologies for this don't even exist meaning we'd have no choice but have human operators of the system 'for now'. If they weren't elected how far would this system go in the real world? Since if we were to implment this system today humans would be centrally controlling it (i.e. Soviet Union), to say that it wouldn't have human operators would be a lie.


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


It becomes appartent that ZP is being misleading in the response to charges of being communist. If you look closely, it more responds to the failure of the Soviet Union in becoming the promised land that Pure Communism is dreamed to provide:

Most importantly, Communism did not eliminate SCARCITY nor did they have a blueprint or the methods for the production of abundance.

They didn't eliminate it, but their dream of the government operated system was infact "superabundance":

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

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

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

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

At this point the only difference between ZP and Karl Marx's original ideas of how far his communism would go is that now robots able to replace humans as slave workers is on the horizon.

They even lack a solid reference list that empirically shows how true the whole idea of abundance is in the first place. And the reality is that ZP doesn't actually have a concrete bluerpint for how to get all of this abundance, other than using renewable energy and robot slaves (that don't yet exist). When there aren't robots to do 100% of all possible work guess who will be doing the labor...

Moving on:

Perhaps through no fault of their own, they also had to maintain huge military expenditures to protect themselves from invasion of fascistic and capitalistic institutions.


If the whole world doesn't agree with ZP, won't the ZP sectors of earth need defense forces?


Communism being similar to a resource-based economy or The Venus Project is an erroneous concept. Communism has money, banks, armies, police, prisons, charismatic personalities, social stratification, and is managed by appointed leaders.

-Already covered "money".

*The Soviet Union had a "bank", but it was nothing like the sorts of banks we have in the 'West':


The Soviet state used Gosbank, primarily, as a tool to impose centralized control upon industry in general, using bank balances and transaction histories to monitor the activity of individual concerns and their compliance with Plans and directives. Gosbank did not act as a commercial bank in regard to the profit motive. It acted, theoretically, as an instrument of government policy. Instead of independently and impartially assessing the creditworthiness of the borrower, Gosbank would provide loan funds to favored individuals, groups and industries as directed by the central government. en.wikipedia.org...

It's hard to see other than the reality of them being Pure Communist (PC), and using the shortcomings of the Soviet Union in comparison to the PC model. From there, they've yet to fully articulate how their system would be different. It would eventually need some form of units to measure total resources by, for efficiency alone, and when 'individuals, groups and industries' have new ideas they'd need resources allocated to them to pursue the idea for the collective good. These resources would have to be allocated to them by the authority in these matters. In teh Soviet Union they called this a 'bank' (or at least we do).

*Jacque Fresco and Peter Joseph are "charismatic personalities". PJ's brother Eric probably isn't a christmatic leader, otherwise we'd surely know his name as well as we know PJ's.

*Trading human operators for machines that are 'elected' by "agreement" mutes this item. "Agreement" is how they explain this will all work, but when people dont agree then they WILL need police and prisons in order for the utopia to work.


As to the need for government, only during the transition from a monetary based society to a cybernated high-technological resource based economy of common heritage would it be necessary to utilize the services of systems analysts, engineers, computer programmers, etc. They will not dictate the policies or have any more advantage than other people. Their job will be to carry out the restoration of the environment to near natural conditions as possible on land and in the sea. They will also economically layout the most efficient way to manage transportation, agriculture, city planning, and production. This too is always in the process of modification and updating to fit the needs of an ever-changing civilization. There are no final frontiers.


Communists also call for the abolition of private property. ZP claims that the "technicians" wont dictate policies, but what else would they be doing carrying out measures based on the "scientific management" of literally everything?

This quote also shows into their environmentalist agenda, which is the main operations center of modren communist agenda setting:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Last but not least, this might be of relevance: Co-creator of the Zeitgest films, Eric Merola, the brother of Peter Joseph Merola, was the animation director for Micheal Moore's "Capitalism A Love Story" anti-capitalism propaganda piece.


[edit on 13-4-2010 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]




posted on Apr, 13 2010 @ 05:49 AM
link   
Zeitgeist is nonsense. I can't remember if it was this or End Game but one completely gave people the idea that Earth isn't over populated because we could give everyone the planet an acre in Australia and not even fill it up.
This "fact" alone made me turn the movie off. Keep populating and kill those resources was what it forgot to mention. These documentaries and movements take the truth, add statements that bend the truth to make it look like it is wrong, and then they manipulate the suckers.



posted on Apr, 13 2010 @ 05:55 AM
link   
And then what happens when the slave robots develop onsciousness and rise up


Lol, everyone knows the Zeitgeist movement is a joke, right? Total NWO propaganda. Yay lets create a system that sounds great in theory but would collapse in on itself due to infeasibility and lack of realistic appraisal of situation... its designed for control as it stands.

Its joined by a lot of well-meaning people who have no real outlet for what they envision so pick this, not because its the best but because its the best sounding that exists... all any one would have to do is set up something slightly better and Zeitgeist would be destroyed.

They also forgot to mention, communism is 100% proven to work every single day, but ONLY on a small scale. Communism is like a biological cell, when it get to a certain size the surface area can no longer contain the volume and it explodes. Also, it is mandatory that all members are VOLUNTARY, or else the dissonance will be its downfall.

Zeitgeist is nothing more than a cult and they're planning their cult compound.



posted on Apr, 13 2010 @ 06:07 AM
link   
When I heard Perter Joseph speaking about "re-education" for those who dont see the Zeitgeist way, that was it for me, I feel Zeitgeist was a crafty attempt to co-opt the general "conspiracy" movement, and push it secrtely towards that which it is opposed.

This certainly sounds a lot like communism, and a lot like where we are heading today, albeit in a Fabian Socialist manner.



posted on Apr, 13 2010 @ 06:24 AM
link   
Zeitgeist is getting the message across to the people that are not aware of the world they live in. It is fair to say that some of the information supplied is hard to swallow nonetheless, it is doing its fair share of waking up the sleeping masses.



posted on Apr, 13 2010 @ 06:35 AM
link   
reply to post by franspeakfree
 


You mean manipulating the mentally weak? Those movies are made to instill a feeling of paranoia in the people. The government isn't as bad as they claim. They also use something like tax raises, which are bound to happen and can be for better or for worse, and figure out a clever way to make them seem premeditated and part of a big plan to screw everyone over. 2000 years people have been around and the elite are planning on taking over now with the massive population that exists today? I don't think so.



posted on Apr, 13 2010 @ 06:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by seangkt
reply to post by franspeakfree
 


You mean manipulating the mentally weak? Those movies are made to instill a feeling of paranoia in the people. The government isn't as bad as they claim. They also use something like tax raises, which are bound to happen and can be for better or for worse, and figure out a clever way to make them seem premeditated and part of a big plan to screw everyone over. 2000 years people have been around and the elite are planning on taking over now with the massive population that exists today? I don't think so.


I think your on a different wavelength as to whats wrong with the movie than the rest of us, read the OP for what I mean.



And "planning to take over"?
What world are you living in, it has been for all intents and purposes been done.



posted on Apr, 13 2010 @ 06:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Outlawstar
 


Yeah he claimed they were communistic. I added and just claimed they are used for manipulation because I just talked to someone about this and felt like saying some more.



posted on Apr, 13 2010 @ 06:52 AM
link   
All government at its core is Communist. That's why things such as communitys and corporations exist. As long as your taxes are going into a system where more than just you are deriving benefit from them. I have no problem with that, moreso the outright thievery of today's politicians.



posted on Apr, 13 2010 @ 07:09 AM
link   
IgnoranceIsntBlisss dont take me wrong, but have you seen these interviews?

Jaque Fresco interview


Peter Joseph interview


As for people 'elected' to orientate machines, they would be rorating individuals, not always the same people.

Technologies that dont even exist as you say, are within our grasp, if we scientifically research in that direction.

I personally don't see any better solution than The Venus Project but if there is, or if there is any solid evidence that TVP is BS, I'd be happy to listen to your point of view. Jaque Fresco says the same, by the way.

Anyway, i just want to point out that i don't want to create any personal conflict in this thread (or any).



posted on Apr, 13 2010 @ 09:15 AM
link   
Is there something wrong with communism? If communism was run properly, it could work. America has used propaganda to make communism seem like a very bad thing. To me, communism sounds way better than the democratic.. sorry i mean capitalist system that is in America today. I would much rather be equal to everyone than be in the bottom 99% of the system while having 1% own 95% of the entire wealth of the US. WOuldn't you agree? As for not having your own property, I think people are getting too materialistic anyway



posted on Apr, 13 2010 @ 10:14 AM
link   
@OP
I appreciate the effort to delineate your view, and your fear is evident, however, it seems you're looking for things that are simply not there.

Your claims strain to support the topic, which you disprove in the first paragraph, making comparisons similar to: an apple has seeds & is a fruit, and an orange has seeds & is a fruit, so apples & oranges are the same!! OMG Proof! See! See!

The difficult fact is, each of the associations you make are based on false presumptions stemming from your own programming & projections.

The choice of words gives you away, illustrating what you've misunderstood or are projecting;

example: your calls to some scary robot "authority" ~ this is pure fiction. In an RBE, there is no central authority, there are only the answers we've derived through the systematic application of the scientific method using the best tools we have. Our answers evolve as our species' understanding's evolves based again, on the data we generate.

If you consider Zeitgeist & TVP free from your own propaganda programming, you might start to see the strength in the solutions proffered.

I hope this helps; not trying to change your mind or argue (not interested) only to show that your viewpoint reflects false information. I hope you see your way through it and can consider the ideas free from fear-based propaganda.

Best of luck.



posted on Apr, 13 2010 @ 10:17 AM
link   
What I find very interesting about this type of post, at least everyone I have read so far, a lot of thought an effort went into debunking Zeitgeist but literally, absolutely NO mention of something better.............and I am just as guilty!

Have any of you join a pro-zeitgeist group and their chat room? Don't bother! The movement is completely doomed as soon as it is organized. Even Jaque said it isn't perfect.....and it isn't........

The biggest problem with any ideas like this is the people, you and I. We are still working with the same old dogmas that have been screwing us for ages. As long as religion, government and business are involved, at least as they are today, nothing will ever work.

However, to this date, absolutely NO one has ever showed me anything better.

If Zeitgeist does anything, it only serves as a wake up call. Start thinking for ourselves and think outside the box. Instead of wasting time and effort on just debunking, show us something better. This goes for me too.

That is a challenge......

Notice I am not offering anything? As I mentioned earlier, I am just as guilty.



posted on Apr, 13 2010 @ 10:36 AM
link   
Excellent post Oolon; clear thinking.

What confuses me the most is the expectation that everything should be outlined & underlined before even considering new ideas, as if that's how such change works. Simply, you cannot predict how an organic effort such as this will evolve; best to stay loose and not get locked into some rigid paradigm.

There is a time limit for such thinking of course, but i doubt we're anywhere near that limit; we're still working on dealing with the human aspect just to even open a dialog on these topics, as you very well point out.

Such, it's true that TZM / TVP doesn't offer a clear black & white blueprint of the future. But this is in part "by design" for now.

What gets me the most is if one can see there are holes in the movement, and you believe in the advantages put forward, or at least agree that we cannot continue the path the world is on, then short of providing something better, why not help make things stronger, & work to fill in those holes, than simply be happy to exist on destruct mode all the time?

Guess one is easier than the other, but I cannot say positive change ever resulted from complacency or running from a challenge.

Thanks for sharing your view.

[edit on 13-4-2010 by JosephMatthew]

[edit on 13-4-2010 by JosephMatthew]



posted on Apr, 13 2010 @ 02:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by kr0ss
IgnoranceIsntBlisss dont take me wrong, but have you seen these interviews?


Um, yeah. And I've seen both Zeitgeist films, plus the orientation video, and Future By Design. Same stuff as written on their website.

In the JF interview he even talks about trying to join up with the communists as a youth but they didnt like his questioning. But just because he didn't 'register' with them doesn't mean he isn't a communist in philosophy.


As for people 'elected' to orientate machines, they would be rorating individuals, not always the same people.


What about the best people for the job? If its going to be its best 'scientifically' it wouldn't want subpar people in the wrong areas. Soon it becomes 'alright bubba we've scientifically decided your best for operating that shovel'.

Or does it? In reality they argue for a total machine takeover. My other ZP criticism thread goes to the full depths of this idea of a total machine takeover, which is 'bs':
Zeitgeist Movement = most hardcore NWO propaganda ever.


I personally don't see any better solution than The Venus Project but if there is, or if there is any solid evidence that TVP is BS, I'd be happy to listen to your point of view. Jaque Fresco says the same, by the way.


Well, you can have a world centrally controlled by a monolithic communistic machine dictatorship, one in which once the machines exceed human intelligence (as is needed for it to even work) we face being annhilated, or we can strive for a world where people have a choice of what type of society they want to live in. Right now the US federal government is already too monolithic. I tried to get some discussion going about solutions not too long ago:
How would YOU build the new society?



posted on Apr, 13 2010 @ 03:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by JosephMatthew
I appreciate the effort to delineate your view, and your fear is evident, however, it seems you're looking for things that are simply not there.


I don't fear ZM, because I know it wont happen via the ZM. What I do fear is the same system is being built by the elitist technocrats who run the world. ZM is propaganda promoting the very same system I've been opposed to for years. Philosphically, ZM is my nemesis.


Your claims strain to support the topic, which you disprove in the first paragraph, making comparisons similar to: an apple has seeds & is a fruit, and an orange has seeds & is a fruit, so apples & oranges are the same!! OMG Proof! See! See!


That is a grossly improper comparison, of my comparison. I didnt compare 2 things with another. I compared ZP with Communism. A proper comparison would be "If it walks like a communist, and smells like a communist, and tastes like a communist, and talks like a communist, and thinks like a communist then it must be a communist". The funny thing is when I tried to go debate them at the ZM forums a while back they banned me within 24 hours, when I had even mentioned that if they ban me just because I dont agree they would in effect prove themselves to be Stalinist.


example: your calls to some scary robot "authority" ~ this is pure fiction.


Machines controlling everything is absolutely what its about, its right on the website. My thread here mainly focuses on the technological aspects, and hopefully we can keep the focus of this one the communist aspects.


In an RBE, there is no central authority, there are only the answers we've derived through the systematic application of the scientific method using the best tools we have. Our answers evolve as our species' understanding's evolves based again, on the data we generate.


That's easy to say, but those are just words. There HAS to be a central authority, as ALL global resources MUST be assessed and rationed accordingly. Humans ARE NOT smart enough to do this, therefore you'd require machines smarter than humans.


If you consider Zeitgeist & TVP free from your own propaganda programming, you might start to see the strength in the solutions proffered.


What I learned by going to their forums is that if you ask hard questions showing the weaknesses of their ideas, you get banned with your IP address blocked. You can find those same hard questions in my other thread.

What you haven't laid out in concrete is how it wouldnt be communist. In fact you havent even specifically addressed anything in my OP, other than the robot army. I used their own quotes and showed how word for word it is exactly the same a "Pure Communism", where the only difference worth mentioning is that they intend to do it with a robot army that didn't exist in the days of Marx or even today for that matter.


only to show that your viewpoint reflects false information.


You havent shown that. You've only regurgitated the euphamistic words of the ZP propaganda materials. Please lay out a CONCRETE model of how it wouldn't require a central authority. Just saying that the central authority isn't one doesn't mean it isn't.

[edit on 13-4-2010 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]



posted on Apr, 13 2010 @ 11:25 PM
link   
reply to post by bulletproof_monk
 

As I said above, communism 100% does not work on large scale. It is 100% proven to work every day, in small scale, such as farm stead, family life, group efforts... and as I said, it must be completely voluntary, the members have to WANT to participate and put effort in to it, or else you get the loafing effect, which inevitably has happened large scale.

Thats capitalism. Putting in no effort but reaping the rewards, ie. exploiting (capitalising) off others. For communism to work large scale they would require COMPLETELYY wiping all notion of capitalism/superiority/competition off face of the earth, and thats just not human nature.



reply to post by Oolon
 

What a great argument

I havent seen a good system so lets all jump on the bandwagon of this #ty system because it appears slightly less #ty than our present one.

I have posted many times of this site what I call the 'vodka effect'. People all support one thing stupidly simply because they have not been exposed to anything better, and the promoters act like it is the greatest and only thing in the world. Add isolation, group cohesion, and group primary identity.

This is how cults work. Zeitgeist is a cult.

And like the most intelligent people ive ever known all said, 'better the devil I know than the saint I dont'. At least we know the flaws in our current system and can work on them, with Venus crap wed be winging it as it went along.



posted on Apr, 13 2010 @ 11:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Ridhya
 


Yes i agree with you there and im not saying that youre wrong. Im just saying that no way of governing people is going to be perfect. There is always going to be people out there that are greedy and corrupt and want to be better than others. What im saying is that capitalism promotes this kind of behaviour and makes people greedy and corrupt because they become way too materialistic and have a need for more and more money. There is never going to be enough. At least with communism, it doesnt promote being materialistic, its actually the exact opposite. It promotes equality and sharing. I for one think that is much better than the capitalist way of thinking where you only think about yourself and not the homeless people who cant even afford food. I dunno is it just me?



posted on Apr, 14 2010 @ 12:59 AM
link   
No, its not just you... I used to be very idealistic and Lenin is one of my heroes but eventually realism bit me in the ass.

Communism is idealistic not realistic... much as I wish it could work world wide I know its like a cell, its perfect up to a certain size right before it bursts...

I think of capitalism and communism like ying and yang, they must be in perfect proportions, in harmony, to work (steadily), but since balance is near impossible, it works more like a cycle.

If you have capitalism first, the rich hate to level to the poor and do anything to keep in power... til they revolt and bring in a new system, which then collapses and degrades in to the same (competitive) system as before. Possibly due to egotism (one feeling underrepresented or not getting fair share).

If you have communism first no one is happy as you need time to develop 'consumer goods' to keep people happy, happy worker is a good worker... well if people get no 'reward' from working hard they will not and this too will collapse, and whichever first system comes in to reward people will succeed... which is often fascism.

In my opinion there is no such thing as stagnancy, standing still is death, change is progress, even if seems backwards. Ironically change is perfection, perfection implies in our mind something so good it can handle everything, however the only thing capable is change, ie to adapt to new challenges. Therefore perfection is change.

I think it works like a cycle, first one then the other, endlessly repeating, symbiotic almost, if either were removed it would become stagnant (unchanging) and self destruct. Both are required for either to exist.



posted on Apr, 14 2010 @ 02:37 AM
link   
From the communism.org FAQ on Communism:


What is Communism?
Scientific definition:

A classless society with no exploitation. No state machine used by one section of the population to oppress another section. No need for professional armies or police forces. No use of production for profit or exchange. Society runs in accord with the principle: From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.


Sounds just like ZP to me. Of course it then goes on, like ZP, to give a "BS definition":


BS definition (ie: commonly believed--but WRONG)
Rule of society by a single party which maintains a monopoly of political power and suppresses all opposition. Control of the economy via centralized bureaucratic planning.

Examples of BS definition: the former Soviet Union, China, Cuba, North Korea, etc.


The thing is, this is what history has always shown communist system to be in practice.

It then links to another page titled "The Self-Organizing Moneyless Economy".

Why does this sound familiar?

This site actually does a better job of explaining how to do ZP than ZP does. You Zeitgeister's might be better able to articulate how to do ZM if you read this website.

[edit on 14-4-2010 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]





new topics
top topics
 
10
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join


Haters, Bigots, Partisan Trolls, Propaganda Hacks, Racists, and LOL-tards: Time To Move On.
read more: Community Announcement re: Decorum