I just finished watching Peter Joseph’s Zeitgeist: Addemdum.
Here’s a preview:
I was reluctant to watch it after the mental upset the first Zeitgeist caused me, but watch it I did. It is 2 hours long and pretty riveting.
We intend to restore the fundamental necessities and environmental awareness of the species through the avocation of the most current understandings of who and what we truly are, coupled with how science, nature and technology (rather than religion, politics and money) hold the keys to our personal growth, not only as individual human beings, but as a civilization, both structurally and spiritually. The central insights of this awareness is the recognition of the Emergent and Symbiotic elements of natural law and how aligning with these understandings as the bedrock of our personal and social institutions, life on earth can and will flourish into a system which will continuously grow in a positive way, where negative social consequences, such as social stratification, war, biases, elitism and criminal activity will be constantly reduced and, idealistically, eventually become nonexistent within the spectrum of human behavior itself.
In the first 25 minutes Peter Joseph takes another punt at explaining the money system as it works in the USA and more or less the same in many parts of the world. He does better this time around than in the original Zeitgeist movie, revisiting ideas that money is debt and debt is slavery, and relating it to todays concerns around interest and inflation. The next 30 or so minutes focus on John Perkins and his terrible testimony as an economic hitman helping to assert US control around the world through the creation of debt and corruption. Then it goes utopia (nothing wrong with hope for the future is there?) with Jacque Fresco with Roxanne Meadows talking about the Venus Project. And finally Peter proposes what we must do to free ourselves from this very ordinary existence, starting with careful self observation.
I must admit, I had a tear rolling down my face at the end there, partly through reflection of just how shitty this set up is, and partly at the realisation of just how impossible it is to bring about meaningful change that might just make it a little less shitty for a few more of us. Then again, this movie is bold in its hope, why shouldn’t I be also? Perhaps the new age is arriving, perhaps there is a change coming, the long anticipated age of aquarius is due soon, perhaps just as the moon affects the oceans, our women and our moods, the sun’s orbit and the Earth’s precession is about to affect us in a similarly big way.
Now, I realise there would be quite a few very pragmatic, teacherly types rolling their eyes at me again… “oh gawd, what’s Leigh saying now”… but this post is just notes really. The movie, like the last, has had an affect on me – I can say that much, and it has motivated me to want to learn about stuff. I’ll just have to turn down the volume of all the inevitable nay sayers, not so I can’t hear them, just so I can hear myself.
12 comments
Comments feed for this article
October 22, 2008 at 11:43 am
Sean FitzGerald
I watched this movie when it first came out, so my thoughts are from memory.
I was pretty skeptical after the first Zeitgeist which was very conspiratorial with it’s Illuminati and One World Order and one world currency etc., but this one wasn’t like that at all.
The stuff around how money is created out of debt was really eye-opening and very relevant to the current global credit crisis. I did my own research to ensure that this wasn’t just more conspiracy theory and found out things were as bad as the movie said. The working of the fractional reserve banking system is just plain scary. It’s interesting to see how modern capitalism has it’s own self-destruction built into it.
While some of the talk of the need for a shift in consciousness to be able to deal with the coming crises (Peak Oil, climate change and economic meltdown) was interesting, there are many other thinkers and writers exploring what’s happening and what we can do about it that say it better, in my opinion.
I’m not sure why they picked on the Venus Project as the only solution to a sustainable society. Whilst it seems to have some good points it’s way too techno-utopian. The artists’s impression looked like something out of the space-age 50s! There are many better, more comprehensive, more sophisticated (and certainly more realistic and grounded) strategies and systems being developed for sustainable societies out there, like Transition Culture, the Re-localisation Movement, New Urbanism etc.
What bothers me is that this movie will use the power of media to push this limited agenda to the exclusion of other systems and ideas. I think there is a real need for many of the best ideas on sustainability and the coming crises to be presented in a movie and/or animation format, since many people don’t seem to read much anymore and prefer to get their information in this way. Get to it Leigh! š
If anyone is interested in following some of the best ideas about how we can use technology to create a more sustainable society that doesn’t shy away from the severity of the crises we are facing or the difficulty of making the systematic changes that will be required to avoid them or the limits of technological change without a change in consciousness then I recommend subscribing to WorldChanging – http://www.worldchanging.com/ (coincidentally they are currently running a series on “how universities and colleges around the world are integrating theories of sustainability into traditional majors to give students the skills they need to build a more sustainable future for all.” )
October 23, 2008 at 8:48 am
Mark Nichols
;o)
October 23, 2008 at 5:06 pm
leighblackall
Thanks for the Comment Sean, through you (and others) I’m reading RealitySandwich now.
October 24, 2008 at 8:08 pm
davidmcquillan
I finally got around to watching the whole thing. Interesting ideas.
I’m intrigued, but still not convinced by the idea that the fractional banking system might be reaching the end of it’s days. I’m not convinced because of two things
1) The movie says that in order for monetary expansion to occur, an expansion of goods and services must match this expansion. This is not exactly true, because inflation acts to devalue currencies. From my admittedly limited understanding, I believe that it’s more accurate to say the expansion of goods and services must expand only if the amount of currency in the market expands faster than the rate of inflation.
2) Even if you assume that the goods and services provided must keep expanding, this is not actually as impossible as the film makes out. There are plenty of intangible goods and services which do not require the use of a finite resource. Software, music, knowledge, and internet service provision is exploding at the moment.
So I’m not convinced. I would like to look into it more, but don’t have the time unfortunately. Charle’s Einstein’s article from Reality Sandwich was an interesting read – thanks Leigh for the heads-up on that.
That’s only one of the ideas that the film put forwards however, and there were many of merit. The description of societal indoctrination and socially enforced conformity was a goodie, the perspective on corporate manipulation of the political environment also rang true. The discussion of religion and the underlying spiritual nature of reality although a bit condescending also had some real moments of truth. Ultimately it’s the relationships that we have with ourself and others that makes life worth living. These are all important things to consider.
Unfortunately for me these ideas were tainted by some of the “reject the system” agenda. I don’t think turning your back on “the system” is the best way to go about changing anything.
I almost didn’t make it through the Venus project section, but a re-reading of your post convinced me to go back & finish it off. Thanks for that, it was well worth it. š
October 24, 2008 at 8:40 pm
davidmcquillan
Oops
Should have said “the provision of goods and services must expand only if the amount of currency in the market expands faster than the rate of inflation.”
October 24, 2008 at 11:00 pm
Sean FitzGerald
David: You may be interested to read this review of the Venus Project on the P2P Foundation Blog – http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/the-venus-project-as-old-futurism/2008/10/23
I agree with it, and am reminded of one of my favourite cartoons doing the rounds at the moment – http://socsci2.ucsd.edu/~aronatas/project/cartoon.math.miracle.3.12.htm
October 25, 2008 at 9:38 am
P2P Foundation » Blog Archive » Thomas Greco reviews Zeitgeist Addendum
[…] An extra review by Leigh Blackall: […]
October 25, 2008 at 10:43 am
leighblackall
Thanks for the great comments and additional references Dave and Sean. It is a real shame that the movie only used the Venus Project, as Sean points out – there are far more interesting and sophisticated projects being implemented now. Although, it was nice to just indulge in some utopianism through the film just a little.
I agree Dave, something isn’t quite right about the money side of things. I don’t know enough about it to comment, but what you say sounds fare enough. The only thing I would say that everything does need real resources though – even if its just to feed and shelter the programmer or the people behind the intangibles.
October 25, 2008 at 1:39 pm
Blogroll » Thomas Greco reviews Zeitgeist Addendum
[…] An extra review by Leigh Blackall: […]
October 25, 2008 at 1:46 pm
davidmcquillan
I was trying to get a grip of party policies today, and came across this page which seems to illustrate the theoretical basis of what Joseph is trying to get at.
Love the cartoon Sean. lol
October 25, 2008 at 1:49 pm
davidmcquillan
(This page) above is a link btw. Don’t know why it’s not showing as blue on my screen?
October 31, 2008 at 9:52 pm
Steven Parker
Read this illuminating quote Leigh.
‘When the accumulation of wealth is no longer of high social importance, there will be great changes in the code of morals. We shall be able to rid ourselves of many of the pseudo-moral principles which have hag-ridden us for two hundred years, by which we have exalted some of the most distasteful of human qualities into the position of the highest virtues. We shall be able to afford to dare to assess the money-motive at its true value. The love of money as a possession ā as distinguished from the love of money as a means to the enjoyments and realities of life ā will be recognised for what it is, a somewhat disgusting morbidity, one of those semi-criminal, semi-pathological propensities which one hands over with a shudder to the specialists in mental disease … !!!!!!!!!But beware! The time for all this is not yet. For at least another hundred years we must pretend to ourselves and to everyone that fair is foul and foul is fair; for foul is useful and fair is not.!!!!!!!!!!!!! Avarice and usury and precaution must be our gods for a little longer still. For only they can lead us out of the tunnel of economic necessity into daylight.
“The Future”, Essays in Persuasion (1931) Ch. 5, JMK, CW, IX, pp.329 – 331, Economic Possibilities for our Grandchildren (1930); as quoted in “Keynes and the Ethics of Capitalism” by Robert Skidelsy ‘
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/John_Maynard_Keynes
Interesting coming from a famous banker of the past and key architect of the current Breton Woods System in crisis. Ironically sounds similar to the espoused ideals of this slick Zeitgeist movie, a nice sales pitch, not for me.