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.
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.
There was a strange thread of reasoning coming from the statement in this article about the pointlessness of moving your money away from the main banks as it all goes to the central bank.
While this is true, you’re missing the point as stated at the end of the film. It is clearly stated that this is an action of creating awareness. Many people moving their accounts away from the main banks will raise awareness and provide those doing it with an opportunity to explain why, if enough people do it. It is a form of protest, not an actual solution in any form.
Like the first movie, this one must be taken with a pinch of salt. I certainly agree with the author of this article in that the main purpose these movies serve, and they do it very well as is evidenced on this page, is to start articulate discussions about important contemporary problems, instead of just “YEEEAAAH, FUCK THE SYSTEM!”
While I think that the system must be changed, it can only be done through informed consensus, which itself can be only achieved through raising awareness. This is the purpose of ideas such as boycotting the major banks.
@chris,
props for your first post.
A buddy just came back from Florida…on a film shoot of The Venus Project.,…I can assure you that IT IS REAL…and all of you who have not been there…and are “making assumptions”….are completely….completely WRONG. Yes, they have had a web site for 8 years….but we have WALKED THE SITE. What Zeitgeist does not do…. and it is a dis-service…is show the grounds of the Venus Project…where they are DOING what they are TALKING about !!!!!
first of all i’m not even gonna comment on the author ’cause he/she won’t understand anyway. zeitgeist is not a comedy nor is it a conspiracy. the word conspiracy is an empty word which doesn’t mean much more than a cover up to make it look bad. conspiracies are nothing more than another theory trying to seek some truth. ’cause truth is one thing we have lost sight of wether it be that zeitgeist or any other theory is true or not is irrelevant. you see the fact that we don’t know whats really going on in the world says enough. and the only way to find truth in this chaos of information is to use your logic. and thats where the trouble begins, see most poeple don’t have logic. believe me i have tried to bring some facts in an order to some people and the only thing i got as response is a vague look on there face and then almost instinctifly try to proof you are wrong even if they have no idea of what they are talking about. it’s also very interesting to see how the arguments of zeitgeist hold up to the critics. the zeitgeist arguments are nearly always logical, well thought through and always benefits the whole, solving the problem at the roots. what most critics do is to find some details, throw it out of context and than flagging it as false info and so it must be fake, somehow you never hear them about the real important stuff, the overal message, the big picture. and it’s always personal attacks too, you ever noticed that? they also think that repeating things a million times somehow makes it more true. but never really big stuff that really shakes the base and makes the argument fall. it’s always sentences like: it’s just flat wrong, it’s largely a dream, it’s just dilussional thinking etc.etc. i’m not saying zetgeist is true it’s just an observation.
“poeple are fucking stupid”
“first of all i’m not even gonna comment on the author ’cause he/she won’t understand anyway”
“the only way to find truth in this chaos of information is to use your logic. and thats where the trouble begins, see most poeple don’t have logic.”
Those who live in glass houses …
People are fucking stupid was obviously writing fast. But I don’t think he’s wrong in all points. It is true that the film is quite consistent all the way throught, although some inconsistencies that can be criticized (like the Siemens Logo at the end of the Addendum). But there’s a book in Spanish called “The principle of cooperation” by philosopher Mauricio Abdalla, which more or less proposes the same as Zeitgeist, but makes a much deeper but simple analysis of what he calls the two crisis of humanity (nature crisis and sociability relations crisis). I’m translating the book, and I will publish it on my webpage as soon as I’m done with the translation. He basically postulates that the competitive exchange rationality that rules this world is the origin of all crisis and that it should be substituted by the NEW-OLD rationality of cooperative exchange applied to every exchange, either between humans or between humans and nature. That’s basically what I extract from Zeitgeist but with different words, and I like it.
I hope all us who think in a very similar way, who enjoy giving to others, WITHOUT expecting (cause we know if everyone would do so, we all would receive), could sometime get together, and start building an alternative to the shit in which we live in. It will probably fall by itself, but a more or less established alternative is necessary.
When I said humanity I meant mankind. I hate “false friends”
The suggestion to abandon the 3 large banks has me puzzled as well.
However, I disagree with the article’s point that the banking system is not the root problem. Most commercial banks are publicly traded, but this has little practical significance. John Doe has zero practical ownership.The FED, however, is a series of private banks and represents the small end of the funnel where all of the money accumulates. The FED *is* the root of all monetary evil.
A far better proposition in my mind would be to eliminate all personal debt. Why was this not proposed?
Has any one else noticed that some references to terms, and ideas discussed in Zeitgeist have been deleted from Wikipedia. Seems to me like someone doesn’t want people looking too far into these ideas. ie, totalitarian agriculture and the law of limited competition etc. Terms that are potentially thought provoking into questioning the way things are.
Another interesting thought is that right now congress is pushing to censor the internet, and control what is on it. If successful, this has huge implications on the freedoms the internet provides as a place of sharing information amongst each other. The internet is our most important tool of communicating on a global scale and there are people who do not like this. Sounds like another violation to our rights and freedoms amongst many other limitations the government uses to “maintain our safety”.
Look, to the guy who thinks fed res is owned by share holders is completely asleep. Still after everything you saw. Stop over trying to be intelligent. Who does the united states owe trillions of dollars to? Share holders? So we owe trillions to our selves? And you think these banks are really in trouble? Now think very carefully. Are the banks in trouble. Why when they own allllllllllllllllllll that property being foreclosed on. Ever played monopoly? What happens when you win. You own the whole board right? People have got to wake up. Our polititions are either in on it, want piece of it or know that they will die of mysterious circumstances if they get out of line.
The only thing that I have a hard time understanding is that these plots with the federal reserve were masterminded by people 100 years ago. Not one of their children stood out from the brainwashing of their parents and said, “You have gone crazy dad? No I will not continue this immature quest to own the whole world”. “Not all people have evolved enough to think for themselves but there is alot of people that have evolved and dont deserve to be herded like sheep.”
Come on not one Rockerfeller? Not one Rothschild said “no dad this is wrong and you have to be stopped.”? Why do they all hate us so much. Are we really that stupid? Not worthy of respect and love. How do they teach there kids, with probably the best education in history, to want to see us enslaved like this. Don’t they see the beauty in love or friendship.
Do they know somthing we dont about ourselves? Do we unlock this hatred in ourselves after we made our first million? Billion? TRILLION? Do people with all that money and power get an insatiable thirst for more? At all costs. No matter who suffers?
I wonder what would happen if they get their one world order and there is no more to own or conquer will they start killing us off until thare are no more people left. Will they bear a child and have to tell them, “Yea son we own everything. Corrupted everyone. They is nothing left to do to statisfy this inquenchible thirst of ours. Should we kill them off until we are the only ones left on the planet so that there are no tresspassers on our planet? Will that make us feel better? What do you think son?
You are all right because you all exercised your power to think, question, and postulate recommendations. Bravo. The awareness is starting to spread. We all have to stand up to this modern day slavery and march to the same beat of the drum towards brotherhood/sisterhood.
When borrowers default on loans, the banks only lose the money they created out of thin air in the first place. Acording to the movie, at least, the entire monetary system is an eleborate shell game in which the ordinary consumer is always the loser. Sounds far-fetched? Take a look around you!
Okay i have a few flaws to point out within this article.
One: the author states that maglev technology is science fiction…ever been to japan? the technology for magnetic levitation was researched in 1962 and made a consumer reality. look up Central Japan Railway Company on wikipedia. and actually it is entirely possible for it to travel at speeds of 4000 miles/hr the technology when you take away factors such as friction which prevent the train from travelling at these speeds safely and replace the medium with a vaccum where there is virtually no interference all that is left to improve is the maglev technology itself. computers were once the size of buses. now they are smaller than pennies why can this technology not have the same potential? science relies on the “what if” to make technology real it relies on what is seen as “absurd” to turn it into reality
Two: Peter joseph is not insinuating that the only way to solve this problem is to join the movement dont even begin to compare what is stated in the movie with what the administration spouts out. let me give you a comparison
“You are either with us, or the terrorists”
Explanation: join us or we will hunt you down.
“You can continue to remain a slave to the monetary system and watch the injustices commited around the world while placating yourself with vain entertainment and materialistic garbage or you can focus your energy on true lasting holistic change… it is up to you but the true change must come from within.”
Explanation: you can remain in a realm you are comfortable with or you can take a step into something new, and try to make the world a better place it’s your choice
huge difference.
so i wonder if the author has problems with actually joining the movement (which is okay to each is own) or to the idea that we can actually better ourselves as a people without money.
Hello to everyone,
Finally I made it to watch Zeitgeist Addendum and I can say that most of the things said are respected by me. There is one or two things however that made me feel awkward about it.
The worst thing is the Siemens Ad at the end of the movie which is against everything told before (Except if Siemens is a BIG supporter of the maglev trains of Venus city….)
I would love to hear someone’s different opinion (in case I miss something).
Second the boycottage thing of the 3 banks is a little strange too since all banks have the same root. Of course I don’t have a strong opinion on the matter since I do not live in the states (but I think banks are the same allover the world). I strongly agree about the TURN OFF YOUR TVs and stay out of the army things (although in my country army service is not optional). And of course I love the way this documentary made me think (even if I don’t intend joining the club). I believe this documentary should be watched by all since it can answer some things and may change our lives immediately, by thinking twice when we desire that 1000 $ burbery bag or gucci suit (there I go making ads myself!). We don’t really need these things and of course we should never use our credit cards for getting them, although I think it is already late for many of our fellowmen.
Greeting to all,
I would love to read your posts on my thoughts.
I like to start off by saying, it is sad how many of the bloggers here bicker about grammar mistakes and trivial mis quotes. I’m purposely going to mispell words. so ha!
I saw both films and they pretty much summed up my opinions on everything. The only thing I’m critical of is the second part of the first film.
Chris summed up alot of what I think.
I came on this site to find some real criticizm on the movie because the film just coincides with my opinions too much, that I had to challenge it. And so far, not one of you has REALLY debunked or discredited any parts of the film. At best some of you convinced me to take a second look.
About centralized banking, there is no conspiracy there, the system is designed to keep people in debt so they can consolidate their ownership and power. Just look what is happening now. The Fed is going to buy up all the banks that are bankrupt, and all the car manufacturers, and so on. If anyone really has so much faith in our country and the monetary banking systems to the point where you don’t believe that almost every war after WW2 was just to protect investor’s interests, then I admire your dedication. Just research it. Especially South America. And to address the comment about the banks loosing money when people can’t pay their loans, is small minded. That doesn’t mean sh$t. If they don’t get your money they get your property and so foth. It’s about control and power. They create money out of thin air anyways so cares! Democracy has always been an illusion. Just ask all the black african americans that lived through segregation. We don’t have rights, we have privileges. What real part can we play in a democracy when all the choices have been designed and manipulated to stroke your egos and ignorance. As for the VP, I truly believe that utopia can work, BUT, I don’t think it will ever happen or not to the extent it speaks of. I believe some people are just born rotten to the core, and no matter how wonderful life is for them they just need to control things and make the rest suffer. I don’t think that utopia will prevent child molesters and such.
I purposely avoided religon because of how strongly I detest it. enough said. If there is any thing worth researching and getting a better understanding is the subject of the monetary banking system.
for the most part I think everyone put genuine thought in their comments. thanks!
The Zeitgeist Addendum is fascinating to watch. It posts brave points that are supported by valid evidence, not only in the movie and the website, but also the world around us. You know a film has meaning when you can continue to see examples of what was discussed, on a daily basis. Sure it is filled with eerie music and a fair amount of “propaganda”, but as questioning free thinking citizens, I find it hard to believe that people could not take an objective standpoint because of it.
As for the Venus Project, I also find it bold that the time was taken to actually propose an alternative social siystem to such an established and engrained monetary system. Whether this place exists or not is irrelevant, it simply provides support to a strong argument by providing a ficticious world whereby children could be born into a society less governed by greed.
All in all, for a documentary to challenge the very basis by which we live, and do so even slightly convincingly, without sounding like a conspiracy theory, is a fabulous triumph.
I think people need to stop questioning and requestioning and muddling themselves up by trying to deduce whether these theories are right or wrong, founded or unfounded. Just take the documentary for what it is, check facts that you might question, and see if the world around you can support these arguments. Don’t get lost in religious debates that lead nowhere. In fact, my biggest criticism of Zeitgeist was including religion in the argument at all.
ps. I mentioned real world examples… just have a look at portugal at the moment. They have become the most sustainable clean-energy country in the world at the moment. WInd energy, solar and tidal enerfy are their primary uses at the moment and well on their way to becoming 20% off the unrenewable energy grid.
I think most of these personal attacks and critics, can be tracked down to the fear of flip over their life standard, and take a stand out from the established pack/fellowship.
A desperat act of aggression as a way to survive, but acctually has the opposite effect in a long term.
Fear is a very deep rooted emotion and its a great source for personal develoupment to recognize and examinate it.
Also I think a goal for humankind should ultimately be develoupment.?
i’m adding this bit hoping it would help in some way…. apparently a new form of enterprise has come up where since due to the recession people are unable to pay their loans and they approach a firm for what is called loan mitigation… for example joe buys a property worth $500,000 and finds himself unable t o pay the interest due to the recession…so he approaches the loan mitigation firm and explain his dilemma… they in turn go through his records and establish the fact that he’s genuinely bankrupt…. now they call up the bank and inform them of the situation… then they explain to them that the property which was at one time worth 500,000 has lost its value due to the recession and that if the bank were to take away the property they would have to wait to find a buyer and that would in turn cost the bank more since they’d have to pay tax on the land for as long as they keep it and it also would be hard to sell the property at this time of recession.so what they will do as a favor to both the bank and joe is that they’ll find a buyer for the property and they will hand whatever money is obtained to the bank thereby helping the bank to cut losses and for this service they charge the bank a certain fee… now i know this happens for sure because my brother works in a firm in america that does this… and apparently this property is bought by the owners of these litigation firms..thereby helping them to buy the property for much less than its actual value… now i dont know how many other firms actually do this but i know atleast one for sure… also makes me really confused as to the real state of things…
there’s so much happening and we have no fucking clue so its good that we argue but lets atleast decide to respect each other as human beings when we do it… no more of these french american indian sudanese pointless inane impotent atttempts at sarcasm….havent we had enough of the discrimination already??? as for those who think that there arent that many hungry people out there or countries that are genuinely and almost literally getting raped by corporations and profit centric organizations i only wish i shared ur blind faith…. as for all the critics of the zeitgeist movement all i say if not anything else shouldnt we applaud this movement for actually being concerned for the world and its plight ? i mean when was the last time u stood up and made an attempt (whatever be your ideals) to make the world a better place… ultimately it boils down to the question is the human mind essentially if one that desires virtue or not ? so if the venus project was to actually happen we would atleast know if we were designed to perish or to flourish cause if it does work out we’ll be out of excuses for our crimes
I agree with zeitgeist addendum in principal and theory however they use the same half truths n omissions of facts that the current system does to further the makers point of view. hypocrisy is the greatest luxury. I think focusing more on the truth and an intellectual approach would have been better as being completely one sided will mean that the film will be considered a conspiracy theory and nothing more when in fact i feel it is mainly true although still completely biased. Everyone should watch this as it is informative but take it with a grain of salt and realise that it is a constructed text presenting the constructors view point (or desire to create interest/hype and therefore $$$ even if it is free the popularity will help his career). Seeing a completely one sided film like this is enlightening though because we are continually force fed completely one sided propoganda from the other side and its hard to see the true middle ground without looking at both extremes. It is completely idealistic and unrealistic but i for one believe in its cause even though i think there is nothing anyone can do to really alter the complete global hegemoney of our current world. oh and i can spell and use grammar i just cant be bothered putting in the time and if you cant understand what i mean then question ur own communication skills. question this. old people diss my generations use of words like u n r n 4 etc but does it not reduce waste? u instead of you means less data 1/3 n therefore less carbon emissions. save the planet with net talk the real idiots are those who dont get it i write academically when needed but aslong as my point is conveyed thats wat counts. and the more concise the better for everyone. I have said what this film says since i was a child but people looked at me like i was crazy for not valueing a person based on how expensive there clothing is and the car they drive, for me atleast it was like yeah see i told you happy little sheep.