Zeistgeist: Moving Forward (Part III)

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by champ01, Jan 30, 2011.

  1. champ01 Guest

    Official Trailer:http://www.youtube.com/embed/QYLLFpNn4lM

    Zeitgeist: Moving Forward, by director Peter Joseph, is a feature length documentary work which will present a case for a needed transition out of the current socioeconomic monetary paradigm which governs the entire world society.
    This subject matter will transcend the issues of cultural relativism and traditional ideology and move to relate the core, empirical "life ground" attributes of human and social survival, extrapolating those immutable natural laws into a new sustainable social paradigm called a "Resource-Based Economy".

    I've watched the movie today and while I like most part of movie it also gave me more and more questions (which is a good think I suppose)

    Who have seen Part 3 so far and wants to the debate about this "Resource Based Economy"? :)
  2. StruckANerve macrumors 6502

    Dec 31, 2008
    Rio Rancho, NM
    I'm going to try and finish watching it tonight. So far it's much better than the first two films. It's unfortunate that most people that post here won't watch it because of the Conspiracy Theory stigma attached to these films. So far I'm not sure if I agree with the idea that the Monetary system is the root of all the problems on the planet. It's a major contributor but I don't believe eliminating money will end all the murder and jealousy on the planet.
  3. Heilage macrumors 68030


    May 1, 2009
    Oh yes, how ever could that be.
  4. floyde macrumors 6502a


    Apr 7, 2005
    Monterrey, México
    The first film certainly grabbed my attention until I started doing some research on the claims made about the parallels between Jesus and Horus (anything that is evidence for the falsity of a religion is of interest to me). At first I was pretty convinced about these claims being true, since there was a list of sources on the web page.

    Apparently the author was hoping that the extreme tediousness of the Egyptian Book of the Dead would keep people from verifying these claims, but it seems that the Jesus/Horus connection is completely bunk. I didn't actually read that myself (extreme tediousness doesn't even begin to describe it), but I found several resources from people who actually do that for a living. After realizing that the first part of the film was completely wrong, Peter Joseph's credibility went down to 0 for me.
  5. StruckANerve macrumors 6502

    Dec 31, 2008
    Rio Rancho, NM
    See what I mean.

    The second and third films are very different than the first film. The first film is almost completely ********. The second film starts off trying to explain Fractional Reserve Banking in Layman's terms. The director does make some errors in his explanation but It's hard to determine if he did it intentionally or if it was caused by his own inability to understand the mechanics of our monetary system and policy.

    The movie continues on with a interview with John Perkins who wrote Confessions of an Economic Hitman and he talks about Assasinations and ousting of certain political heads in other countries by the U.S. He also outlines the policies used by U.S. corporations to attempt to acquire resources in impoverished countries by granting loans that can not be repayed thereby forcing the countries to allow U.S. interests to gain a foothold on their resources.

    Most of the rest of the film is an interview with Jacque Fresco who spearheads the Venus Project, which is a progressive project to create a sustainable Resource Based Economy rather than a Monetary based economy.


    Don't let the first film deter you from watching the sequels. They are much more interesting.
  6. StruckANerve macrumors 6502

    Dec 31, 2008
    Rio Rancho, NM
    I'm going to post the Fresco's theory on the how an economy should run. Maybe it will entice some of the more Liberal or Collectivist posters to watch it. Taken from Wikipedia.


    "According to Fresco, poverty, crime, corruption and war are the result of scarcity created by the present world's profit-based economic system. He theorizes that the profit motive also stifles the progress of socially beneficial technology. Fresco claims that the progression of technology, if it were carried on independently of its profitability, would make more resources available to more people by producing an abundance of products and materials.

    This new-found abundance of resources would, according to Fresco, reduce the human tendency toward individualism, corruption, and greed, and instead rely on people helping each other. Fresco believes it is now possible to achieve a society in which people would live "longer, healthier, and more meaningful lives." Fresco believes the monetary system and the processes associated with it, such as labour and competition, damages society and holds people back from their true potentials. He states his ideas would maximally benefit the greatest number of people. He claims some of his ideas stem from his formative years during the Great Depression.

    Fresco believes the current global economic system will have to see a major crisis before people start to lose the confidence in the monetary system and start looking for other directions. Fundamental to the project is what Fresco calls a "resource-based economy". A resource-based economy utilizes existing resources - rather than money - to provide an equitable method of distribution in the most humane and efficient manner. It is a system in which all goods and services are available to everyone without the use of money, credits, barter, or any other form of debt or servitude."
  7. champ01, Feb 5, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 5, 2011

    champ01 thread starter Guest

    I've been doing more and more research and still have many many articles, etc to search thru yet.

    The thing is that I feel much calmer after watching and reading all this information on why we are living and why we are the way we are.

    I think everybody should at least watch:
    - Future by design http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xxe7tlr-2I4
    - Zeitgeist 3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Z9WVZddH9w
    - Larry King 1974 interview with Fresco http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PN6puH9DYnQ
    You'll be shocked to see how much that interview is still relevant in today's society. I'm now reading Looking forward a book dated from 1969.

    I can talk to politicians, religious people etc and have answers based on facts and not say things just based on opinions. Of course I still have many questions unanswered but I see things more clearer now and do better research about that.

    Its all about the right education and knowing the facts!
  8. Queso macrumors G4

    Mar 4, 2006
    Same here. The first film turned out to be almost complete BS, so he's really got no right to complain if people reject his other works.
  9. Nein01, Feb 14, 2011
    Last edited: Feb 14, 2011

    Nein01 macrumors 6502


    Dec 1, 2009
    i've seen all three, and yes, the first one can be hard to swallow for some people, but it's far from "complete BS".

    floyde, the comparison between jesus to horus was but one of MANY. the main argument in that section of the movie was to compare the story of jesus to certain elements of the cosmos, not specifically to horus. hundreds of other gods/prophets were compared in the same way - horus being just one example and they examined a long list of others.

    ancient societies obviously spent a lot of time watching the night sky trying to figure thing out about the universe and in doing so, a lot of personification and myths were drawn from those observations. i would suggest you go back and watch that section again but, in a nutshell, the story of jesus is essentially a plagiarism of the stories of hundreds of previous gods that "existed" before him - all of which are based more or less on the movement of the sun and various constellations. for example: jesus "died" on the cross, was buried for three days, and then resurrected; this parallels the movement of the sun through the winter solstice, spring being the "rebirth". there's a lot more to it, but like i said it's explained in greater detail in the film.

    anyway.. i agree that this third zeitgeist film is really great in that it moves away from religion a little bit and focuses more on the problems stemming from a monetary economy. too many people get offended very easily by any criticism of religion and would therefore be deterred from watching a film like the first zeitgeist. however, more people can get behind the notion that a lot of society's problems are linked to poverty/corporate greed/etc.

    i am hugely interested in the zeitgeist movement and the venus project and would love to discuss it here. i was about to post a link to the movie myself but then did a quick search to find this thread so...


    edit: quick link to aforementioned section of zeitgeist I: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNf-P_5u_Hw
  10. floyde macrumors 6502a


    Apr 7, 2005
    Monterrey, México
    I'm an atheist, so I'm not at all offended by criticism of religion. What offended me was the lack of objectivity displayed in at least that part of the film. There are many legitimate ways to argue about the falsehood of Christianity, but that was just not one of them. As far as I know there is no substantial evidence that supports the claim that Christianity was plagiarized from these ancient myths.

    Most of these parallels that people allude to, come from very poor sources on the internet, which spread because a lot of people merely repeated that information without ever taking the time to actually verify it. A lot of these parallels require some serious amount of mental gymnastics in order to work. Often there are details that are ignored, stretched or fabricated in order to make them fit. If the objective was to instill critical thinking, then it is quite ironic that the author would attempt to do it by suspending his critical abilities.

    IMHO this is a significant credibility issue for Joseph, since he did not merely make a mistake. It takes a certain amount of either negligence or outright dishonesty to put forth such an unsubstantiated argument in a film.
  11. Queso macrumors G4

    Mar 4, 2006
    No it's complete BS. The astronomical references quoted are universally way out, sometimes by hundreds of years, others by thousands, and his understanding of both mythology and etymology is pitiful.
  12. champ01 thread starter Guest

    Now that we see more and more problems around us growing at fast speeds I like to bump this topic again.

    I think there is a hole lot more to say.

    Enjoy the movie :)

Share This Page