Title: Zeitgeist Addendum
Release: 2008
Genre: Documentary
Run Time: 123 Minutes
Author: Peter Joseph
Rating: 73%
URL: http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/ (watch online)
The word “Addendum” implies a small addition or expansion of a larger body of work. Clocking in at 2 hours and 3 minutes, Zeitgeist Addendum is a full-fledged sequel to Zeitgeist the Movie rather than a mere addendum. “Zeitgeist 2” picks up where its predecessor left off by launching a detailed explanation on the mechanics behind the monetary system and fractional reserve banking. Using the American economic system for its examples, the brooding narration explains how the central bank issues notes to the government for deposit in commercial banks, who in turn loan a large fraction of these deposits to consumers. The explanation of money purely as an instrument of debt seems philosophically valid, if not a little cynical. Filmmaker Peter Joseph’s view of the monetary system as both a pyramid scheme and a form of organized slavery serves as a basis for the remainder of the film.
The second phase of the movie features a long interview with John Perkins, author of “Confessions of an Economic Hitman”. Perkins outlines the role and evolution of the so-called economic hitman – a private or public sector agent who corrupts foreign leaders and economies to enable cheap access to national resources. Foreign leaders who do not comply with agents of the corrupting nation (typically from the West) are typically assassinated and replaced with a more “business-friendly” regime. Perkins cites the Iranian coup of 1953 and subsequent installation of the Shah as the first true economic hit while citing Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein and Panamanian president Omar Torrijos Herrera (who signed the bill transferring the Panama Canal from American control) as examples of leaders who refused to be corrupted and were subsequently killed.
Visions of Utopia
Part three and four of the movie deal with The Venus Project, a visionary design for a resource-based economy whose proponents believe all of humanity’s problems can be solved by technology. In such world, the representatives claim, all humans can be fed, housed and otherwise placated by the abundant resources available in a society that uses technology to cater to social needs rather than military or capitalistic objectives. This portion of Zeitgeist Addendum is the most challenging to watch – not just because it is too long, but also because it mixes equal portions of science fiction (e.g. magnetic levitation tube trains traveling 4000 miles/hour), societal absurdities (e.g. no need for laws since every human’s economic needs to be met with technology and there will be no need to commit crime) and genuinely good ideas (e.g. harnessing solar, wind, wave, tidal and geothermal power to minimize or eliminate dependency on fossil fuels).
Focus returns to the monetary system, citing its inherent corruption as the primary reason why societies similar to that outlined by the Venus Project aren’t possible. After once again maligning the banking system as the root of all human woe, Zeitgeist Addendum offers a surprisingly practical list of what the average person can do to exploit the current financial chaos for social transformation. Among the suggested measures are divestment from America’s three largest banks, boycotting mainstream media sources in favour of independent news sources, avoiding military service (extra focus was placed on the effect of post-traumatic stress disorder on Gulf war veterans) and removing from the energy grid.
You’re Either With us or Against us
The movie closes with a stark choice for the viewer – remain a materialistic slave of the monetary system and its divisionary institutions or discover truth and oneness by joining the Zeitgeist movement. The accompanying dramatic sequence depicts a series of business, military and religious people throwing down the symbols and tools of their respective institutions before looking to the sky and embracing a re-colorized earth.
Timing can mean everything to a movie’s success and Joseph chose the perfect time to release Zeitgeist Addendum. The monetary system is in retreat worldwide while defaults skyrocket among consumers and once-unshakable mega-corporations. One narrative at the end of the movie should resonate with even the hardest critic of anti-establishment sentiment:
As of now, the world financial system is on the brink of collapse, due to its own shortcomings. The comptroller of currency stated in 2003 that the interest on the U.S. national debt will not be affordable in less than 10 years. This theoretically means total bankruptcy for the U.S. economy and its implications for the world are immense. In turn, the fractional reserve-based monetary system is reaching its theoretical limits of expansion and the banking failures you are seeing is just the beginning. This is why inflation is skyrocketing, all debt is at record levels, and the government and fed are hemorrhaging new money to bail out the corrupt system – for the only way to keep the banks going is by making more money. The only way to make more money is to create more debt and inflation. It is simply a matter of time before the tables turn and there is no one willing to take new loans while defaults grow, as people are unable to afford their current loans. Then the expansion of money will stop and contraction will begin on a scale never before seen.
-Narration, Zeitgeist Addendum
Sadly, Zeitgeist Addendum devalues such timely and thought-provoking observations with the same dishonest recitation and logical leaps that earned its predecessor the “conspiracy theory” label from skeptics.
- Yes-Yes persuasion. This subtle but effective technique starts with reciting two or more verifiable/probable statements and forcing a conclusion on the plausibility of the previous statements. While a decent argument can be made that debt and interest will inevitably force some foreclosures in any society, one cannot therefore assume that the banks INTEND to bankrupt people and hold them to any kind of modern bondage. In truth, bankruptcy is bad news for the modern bank because most of the assets purchased with consumer debt have limited resale value … and of course the bank is out of the money it loaned. People in many U.S. states can legally walk away from their homes without legal penalty. Furthermore, the existence of a relationship between government and business does not imply premeditation, and in the case of the current sub-prime meltdown even most bankers were not aware of the exposure presented by mortgage-backed securities. If there exists a conspiracy to enslave humanity and consolidate power, it’s proving a colossal failure.
- Willful omission. Attacking banks as omnipotent forces of profit may be fair game, but who owns the banks? The majority of banks are publicly held, traded on the open market. Huge contributors include pension funds, mutual funds and exchange-traded funds. The ultimate owners of these funds are the same “wage-slaves” said to be indirectly working for the bank, regardless of their actually occupation. With few exceptions, the slave does not own the farm. The recent collapse of Lehman Brothers did not result in mass freedom but did wipe out thousands of average people’s retirement savings.
- Drive-by accusations. Alarming accusations and insinuations are placed amid factual statements without elaboration or future reference. While defining terrorism, the narrator claims that the organization Al Qaeda never existed, with the name referring to a database created by American operatives. Another passage insinuates that 9/11 was executed by American forces as a pretext to invade Afghanistan and revive the opium trade.
Shaman or Charlatan?
Zeigeist Addendum’s core message is somewhat contradictory. Firstly, the narrator suggests divesting from the three largest banks as a form of protest, but wouldn’t reinvesting those funds in alternative firms perpetuate the same fractional reserve system? All banks in a nation hold deposits with the same central bank – that’s why it’s a CENTRAL bank.
Secondly, the film suggests joining The Zeitgeist Movement to attain critical mass and inform the world that resources should be free for all of mankind to use. This, the narrator claims is “the only true sustainable solution”. Previously, the film dismissed the world’s major religions (Islam, Christianity and Hinduism) as closed-world views. Why, then, wouldn’t this criticism hold true for a movement promoting the inalienable truth of environmentally-conscious collectivism?
Thirdly, the film states several times that politicians cannot solve humanity’s problems since they are controlled by the same few corporations. These statements are accompanied by flashing images of Democrat/Republican symbols and pictures of the 2008 presidential candidates. However, the film also flashes a picture of failed Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul when speaking of honest politicians who are sidelined by the system. Paul also appears in a C-SPAN clip, sternly questioning FRB Chairman Ben Bernanke. How do we know Ron Paul isn’t also controlled by the same corporations, provided as a distraction to create the illusion of dissidence?
With such gaping inconsistencies in mind, who should watch this film? In some respects, everyone should view this film because it at least challenges our understanding of and allegiance to the social institutions we rarely question. The high points of this film are the initial explanation of fractional reserve banking and entire economic hitman segment – both can be easily verified and/or criticized. The rest is somewhat pie in the sky to this cold pragmatist but can stoke the imagination of more eccentric types. Like Zeitgeist the Movie, Zeitgeist Addendum is primarily a conversation starter, but now the presentation is a bit slicker and the content more relevant to current events.
Related Posts:
I realy love this artical. It articulates alot of the same things I have been thinking in regards to the film. I am actally a member of the Zeitgeist Movement, but I am not a strong supporter of the venus project.I think to attempt to replace our current system with it, would be grossly immature at this point. Perhaps the effects of this system would be self perpetuating, as automation and renewable energys were developed, but we will not be able to tell just yet…The whole Venus project segment on this film is theoretical…communism works in theory as well, but sofarin, there has not been one successful and true communist country that has been able to maintain itself for long.
Anyway. Promotion of the venus system as the only real soloution is only further promoting closed mindedness and submission of your free thought. People WILL question this system, and it will be found lacking, just as any other system would…I think we are far from a solution, but zeitgeist definately points us in the right direction.
No freedom movement can go without criticism,
Zeitgeist has its flaws of course because its creators are human.
One thing that all people should be able to agree upon is that we need to teach critical thinking but also open mindedness because that is what empowers us. People are scared of things they don’t understand and even tho Zeitgeist IS biased it promotes critical thinking of itself which if people actually follow they will be able to formulate their own opinions.
The profit issue is difficult to address because it has many levels.
Even though profit causes competition and advancement, what has been proven to be more effective is cooperation. Cooperation and competition is funded by profit whether it be monetary, intellectual, emotional or spiritual. However defining ‘healthy’ competition and cooperation is impossible while money is spend on weapons/destruction, thus profit is a paradox.
Probably the most vital and important issue discussed in Zeitgeist is the greed that is so evident in all aspects of our lives. We cannot keep up this destructive habit. The problem that has been realised by the world’s greatest minds is that humanity needs a goal, now its up to everyone to decide what this is, if we make the wrong choice we will be miserable, the poor, the rich, the weak and powerful, we will not find peace or happiness. From what the past has shown and what we have experienced in the present, the things that make humans happy are learning, creativity, efficiency, sustainability and abundance. This should be our goal.
“One cannot therefore assume that the banks INTEND to bankrupt people and hold them to any kind of modern bondage.”
If debt is built into the system, we can assume that banks to intend to bankrupt people. How can they not if all of our debts can never be repaid? Remember, there is only enough money in circulation to cover the loans without interest. This inevitably leaves people left out to dry. It’s a fundamental part of the system.
“the existence of a relationship between government and business does not imply premeditation”
maybe not, but this relationship sure seems to always benefit the banks. The banks just got about 1 trillion of our dollars. Maybe not premeditation, but definitely collusion.
“If there exists a conspiracy to enslave humanity and consolidate power, it’s proving a colossal failure.”
Really? Then why did numerous banks just get bought up by the largest banks, thereby consolidating power? As stated in the movie, who do we ultimately work for? The banks. They have enslaved humanity, an economic enslaving. John Perkins knows this first hand.
“Previously, the film dismissed the world’s major religions (Islam, Christianity and Hinduism) as closed-world views. Why, then, wouldn’t this criticism hold true for a movement promoting the inalienable truth of environmentally-conscious collectivism?”
There are significant differences between major religions and what you call “environmentally-conscious collectivism”. Religions are generally focused on the next life, not this one. Only insofar as doing what is dogmatically prescribed to make it to the next life is religion concerned with this life. Most of these ideas are pure faith as that is the nature of religion.
On the other hand, recognizing human’s connection to the earth and our interconnectedness to all creatures is not a matter of faith. It is fact. Recognizing this and acting on it can improve conditions of this world rather than hoping for a better world in the next life. Religion can never do this because it is fundamentally not concerned with this life. See the difference?
Thank you Chris for posting your comment, you wrote most of what I was thinking
Well done Chris,
And here’s my 2p
“People in many U.S. states can legally walk away from their homes without legal penalty.”
And take with them nothing else… the people get nothing, whilst the banks take the house and all payments up until to the client had to default.
The author seems to believe it right that the people should face more than losing everything? a legal penalty also?
there’s more too i’m just too tiered to express it.
Well done Chriss.
Thanks for the thorough analysis! Here’s some more comments about the economic side of film: http://tinyurl.com/44drf6
I think Perter Joseph’s Zeitgeist movies are much influenced in style by the film: Koyanaskatsi (A Hopi word for “Life out of balance”) as well as other affective portrayals of human folly. His target audience is broad as he wishes to influence as many people as possible. His references are brief because he wants people to look further into his concepts and also because he is linking a broad spectrum of knowledge compressed into two hours of film. In short, he is attempting to fight propaganda with propaganda.
What’s important in all this, is that the films have been popular enough to provoke discussion. Some other critical discussion groups have mentioned that, for instance, some claims in the first film about Christs relationship to older models are largely false (not academically accepted). For me, all the details don’t really matter. It must be obvious to most human beings that we are not heading in the right direction as regards solutions to global issues (global poverty, crime, climate change, dangers of global annihilation etc etc) nor accessing true human potential.
As far as we know, we are unique in the universe. Our (relatively) little revolving globe is special. The whole array of lifeforms on this planet is special. We humans are exceptionally special. All these precious Ideals and identities we cherish, promote & fight for, will be just cosmic dust unless we develop a deeper consciousness and adapt our survival instincts towards the matter at hand: immanent global catastrophies and the suppression of human aspirations.
One tragic aspect of human nature is to hold on to survival mechanisms that have become an inappropriate habit: out-dated biological, psychological & institutional adaptations to the survival of our genetic codes. The path to overcome them isn’t easy. But without a refreshed adaption through global collective co-operation we are heading for planetary suicide or the near total destruction of everything we hold close to our hearts: those very Ideals & identities we have defended for so long.
If the messages in these films can even break the ice for our species to “wake up” (become conscious) and pull all our strengths toward building a marvellous and astounding future together, then I say, “Good on you, Peter Joseph!”
After all, our species has never been so fortunate in terms of technological control of our environment and our potential is possibly as infinite as the universe we inhabit. Our consciousness & social structures have to be reintegrated or we die from folly!
Peter Joseph’s own replies to criticisms
http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/q&a.htm
The Venus Project is not real, its a fictional organisation, the PUNCHLINE of the movie!
The documentary bit is pretty real (film 1) but the solution is just for entertainment. The film shows how easily people are brainwashed into following ’social systems’ and then does the same to the viewer by making them believe the end scenario. Film 1 and the first part of film 2 are designed to make the viewer susceptible to ‘believing’ in the venus project.
It seems to be firing a warning shot i.e. ‘Be careful out there, look what we made you believe using the same simple mind tricks, symbolism and familiarity that the NWO would use.’
Better special effects would have been more believable at the end, rather than Dan Dare future city comic book stylee, but maybe that was also the point because as it progresses the film gives even more clues as to it’s cheekily humorous ending. The priests from all religions throwing down their crosses and so on, the all seeing eye close up, the sun shining through the pyramid hands. Theres even a nod and a wink to the matrix with suggestions that the machines will do all the work.
There are a lot of clever tricks in attempting to make people believe in the Venus project, but enough clues to let you know it’s a wind up. I think maybe there might be a third part or some other Venus/Zeitgeist release soon to further widen peoples understanding of how they can be brainwashed/made more suggestible to organised society. The films illuminate this.
Very cool infotainment !
@Horis,
Do you seriously think the only reason they talked about the Venus Project was as a joke? Regardless of what you think of VP, the film’s creator clearly believes in their goals/ideals. Just visit http://www.thezeitgeistmovement.com
It’s not a joke. Mr. Joseph thinks its a good alternative to what we have.
“There are a lot of clever tricks in attempting to make people believe in the Venus project, but enough clues to let you know it’s a wind up.”
So Mr. Joseph is giving all this exposure to VP because he’s really laughing at them? I disagree.
The Venus Project itself is not a real organisation, it was created for/along with this film. There are lots of posts on blogs, a couple of websites, all set up to make it look real. You never know, if enough people believe its real it might take on more form, but for the sake of the film it was a memetic ‘trick’ on the audience.
The symbolism is so blatant in the movie, theatrical even, it’s a movie ‘about’ a NWO propoganda film, done to be as realistic as possible, by all accounts!
I don’t know if you are being serious now or just bored, because you are blatantly lying. Maybe you should get a job on Fox News.
“The Venus Project itself is not a real organisation, it was created for/along with this film.”
I can see you are not one for research, because this statement is false. Ever heard of the way back machine, internet acrhiver? The Venus Project has had a website for 8 years!
http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.thevenusproject.com
The internet is an amazing research tool. I suggest you use it.
Sorry, bad turn of phrase, I am very suspicious of it’s relationship to the film, they seem to be sharing the same joke.
It’s a spoof of a NWO propaganda film, it is meant as a PARODY of the ideas being discussed here.
It’s a comedy film about media manipulation, psychological Derren Brown type techniques public control and the way people fall for it, some without questioning what ‘truths’ they may have been made suggestible enough to believe…..without checking up.
This is an interesting look at the venus project,by themselves, the second half is hilarious! You say 8 years, this looks like they made the movie in the 60’s. Thunderbirds spring to mind ! http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=Cf1gZxmIDKw
I finished watching Zeitgeist: Addendum few days ago and i was wondering how much of its content is true so I began searching on google, for postings on Zeitgeist: addendum.
First my feedback to the article, not taking anyone’s side, when I was reading the article above, I have to say I wasn’t convinced by author at all. Author uses general statement to criticize some aspects of film rather than specifying exactly what is flawed. As I was reading the article I began to search for a statement that pinpoints what is ‘dishonest recitation and logical leaps’ and why it is so, but I just wasn’t satisfied about the points author made on article.
To make an example, I had trouble with comprehending the part of the article where author states, ‘All banks in a nation hold deposits with the same central bank – that’s why it’s a CENTRAL bank.’ The paragraph starts out, ‘Zeigeist Addendum’s core message is somewhat contradictory’, I mean, what is it proposing? That the core message of the movie is ‘Firstly, the narrator suggests divesting from the three largest banks as a form of protest, but wouldn’t reinvesting those funds in alternative firms would perpetuate the same fractional reserve system?’? I have to say I had to read this part few times trying to figure out what author was trying to say. So author of the article is trying to say here, producer of Zeitgeist: addendum suggests in the movie that (getting rid of) from the three largest bank as a form of protest(?), what does this mean? Author suggests we get rid of (from?) three largest bank(s) as a form of a protest? Was that the core message of the movie? I don’t even know if author knew what he or she was talking about. At least the sentence is just horrible to the point that it can’t be comprehended.
Continuing with the rest of the sentence, ‘-, but wouldn’t reinvesting those funds in alternative firms would perpetuate the same fractional reserve system? All banks in a nation hold deposits with the same central bank – that’s why it’s a CENTRAL bank’ The sentence started out about how producer of Zeitgeist wanting to get rid of largest banks in a form of protest, so what are you trying to say from ‘but wouldn’t reinvesting(?) those funds’? What funds? I thought you were talking about getting rid of three largest banks? I mean, I don’t if it’s just a horrible grammar problem or the statement is basically saying nothing at all. Wouldn’t reinvesting those funds? What? I thought that part of the article just did not make any kind of sense, nor did it help me understand why contents in the film is ‘dishonest recitation and logical leaps’. It just confused me whole lot and it probably would’ve helped if author edited that part more understandable or just remove it from the article.
Finally, my response on comment by Horis.
‘Sorry, bad turn of phrase’? You first falsely stated that ‘Project Venus’ is not real and accused the producer of the movie for making it all up only to persuade the viewer and you had a nerve to reply after your lies have been exposed? In my case, I was searching online to research about the film and if chris didn’t correct your statement, I would’ve received false information, and that pisses me off. Oh and by the way, you write like an author of this article, CAPITALIZING certain words.
‘it is meant as a PARODY of the ideas being discussed here.’
Chris:
Try this -
1) Remove all your money from JP Morgan
2) Put all those funds in any unknown Joe Blow bank of your choice
3) Read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractional-reserve_banking
Now tell me what you’ve accomplished. ZA’s tip was foolish because you cannot fight the monetary system by shifting money around within the monetary system. It really doesn’t matter to the federal reserve WHICH bank has to update the fraction on your deposit.
There is an extra “would” in that sentence. I will remove this error. Thank you for your concern.
Cy
Here is the actual quote from the movie (emphasis mine)
“Boycott Citibank, JP Morgan Chase and Bank of America, the most powerful controllers in the corrupt Federal Reserve System. Expose the banking fraud. Move your money, credit cards or mortgages to other banks. If you own stock in them, sell it. If you work for them, quit. This gesture will express contempt for the powers behind the private banking cartel known as the Federal Reserve, and it will create awareness about the fraud of the banking system itself.”
Move your money? Obviously you have to move it somewhere and there is an extremely strong chance that if you want your money to remain relatively liquid it will have to be moved to similar institutions. The Federal Reserve would be all but unaware of this protest, while the losing banks would simply bombard your mail with fliers and offers to come back, as is already done with people who move their money for other reasons.
Mathew, you are far too anal.
I’m not even going to attempt to explain what i meant, if you are unable to understand other people unless they conform to your grammatical prowess then i suggest you get a life outside of blogs. I bet you tell french people to speak American dont you. I am guessing you are american.
Anyway, ahem. Has anyone thought there might be some Discordian link to Zeitgeist ? The humour in the movie is a give away to something along those lines.
You must agree that things are pretty screwed up at this time for many people. Monetary systems are in deep trouble and people starving across our planet. We should take care of each other and with today’s technology we could if we would put our resources towards that. Instead we choose to think only of our well being. Our society will fail if we continue on the current path.
But that’s fine because it will start over as it has before.
I think many of the points made in the movie about the way we are programed to think makes a lot of sence. We are currently controlled by the NWO they only need to get the currency in line and remove the hard core radicals. You have to realize only a small portion of the world even know or care about what is happening around them. As long as they have money, food and housing they don’t bother with any of this NWO/Utopia thinking.
I crew up very poor for the region of the country I live in. I worked hard for 30 years and have a nice home and family. But I see starving and murdered people every day and can not believe I spent my entire life caring only for myself and family. We rape other countries for their resources and claim to spread democracy. Our government isn’t even based on a democracy it is based on a republic. Or at least it was at one time.
The zeitgeist movie is probably way to far out there for most to understand because of the way they are programed. The Venus Project would take years to implement so I don’t think that’s where to focus. The focus should be on taking care of each other and focusing our resources to better our planet and the people that live on it.
I would suggest we go total green energy. Not green energy that puts money in the corporations pockets but in ours. Electric cars so we don’t need the resources of other countries. The money we would save can be used to spread this technology to other countries. As we accomplished this our society would see how helping people feels good and how it will change the world.
This is not about a movie or conspiracy its about what we have done and how we can fix it.
Dear Cosmoprivateer
Many of your statements in your post I find completely hysterical and I almost pissed myself laughing! What country do you live in? Don’t most countries have underdeveloped areas? I live in Africa dude and I don’t even see “starving and murdered people every day”. Never. Hardly ever on TV even!
Now this is the part I couldn’t comprehend and which made me laugh… “We rape other countries for their resources and claim to spread democracy. Our government isn’t even based on a democracy it is based on a republic. Or at least it was at one time.”
I am no political analyst but aren’t republics normally democratic? Well at least I live in the republic with the most democratic legislature in the world. So I suggest you pay more attention and get your basic story straight before you devise plans to advance the U.S. to even further world domination and oh of course, ummm, (green)world peace. Ha haa…
And what’s with your spelling and grammar over there? This is directed at most of the posts on this page. America’s is main crisis is not control by America’s Federal Reserve Bank like the film suggests, it is spelling. I didn’t even “crow” up there and even I can see this.
Otherwise quite an interesting article and discussion.
Please commence…
Capitalism doesn’t work, watch the movie “Why We Fight” john mccain is in that movie. When you spend majority of the budget that was designed for the people on the milatary, corporations run the world now, they are above the law, there are not accountable to the people. It’s a big club, and your not in it! RIP George Carlin.