New World Re-Order

Yesterday an article appeared in the Ventura County Reporter Online about the Zeitgeist Movement. Fortunately, it's a prime example of a reporter being objective and how it should be done - without the immediate mud-throwing because it challenges a persons ideology or monetary gain. The coined phrase 'New World Re-Order' also sounds much better and has a nice ring to it if I can be that honest. Maybe Michelle Goldberg and Samuel Gilonis can take a hint.

Beyond Copycatism II

Last week I did a blog on Samuel Gilonis, an outspoken critic of the Zeitgeist Movement, who felt it necessary to label the movement as a cult and Jacque Fresco as a racist. The reason why I titled the blog 'beyond copycatism' is because it was obvious to me that types of critique were simply copied from other sources. These sources do the exact same thing and employ a certain tactic so it's a no-brainer as to where the author got his inspiration. His next article which is a reply to Peter Joseph's commentary to the first article is named "Damn Everything But The Circus! A Response To Peter Joseph."

I have no problem with people trying to defend their arguments as long as they do it in a civil fashion. Sadly, some persons don't seem to realize that you can be offensive without using a single curse word. Degrading a person or group will have the same effect. Samuel Gilonis does this although it's a matter of debate whether he's aware of his own actions because right of the dot he insinuates that an entire group of people have fallen victim to sectarian beliefs, yet then wonders why some of them come over to his article to write criticizing replies. Here's a clue Sam, people felt offended. But either he's not aware of the result of his own actions or he's fully aware and milking the situation for what it's worth.

Gilonis also finally reveals his source of information/inspiration: 'Conspiracy Science.' Well, you can wonder if I saw that one coming. The Conspiracy Science blog and forums have been a meeting place for Zeitgeist critics for a few years now and their main task seems to be generating critique for critique's sake. While I believe that some of them genuinely oppose conspiracy theories on that website and as a matter of principal I can understand that, on the flip side that place consists of a number of folks who simply have an ax to grind with Zeitgeist primarily for personal reasons. In other words, the intentions and motivations of Conspiracy Science differ greatly, some having malicious intent.

There a number of contributors there who were banned from the Zeitgeist forums, often for misconduct. It's quite fascinating actually from a sociological point of view. They go to virtual public place thinking they can say and do anything, bully others into submission. Next they get removed from that public place and instead of examining their own actions they blame the people that threw them out. Next they start blogs criticizing Zeitgeist, create anonymous YouTube channels or contribute on forums already generally in line with their agenda and start claiming another group of people are a cult - just to get even with them. Such people aren't actually critics, they are fail-mongers.

If Samuel Gilonis wants to emulate that behavior he's free to do so, freedom of speech and all, but don't count on getting intellectual credit for employing this tactic. Wanting something to fail is entirely different than objectively pointing out its flaws. Don't forget that some people can tell the difference.

Beyond Copycatism

"Jaques Fresco, pioneer of The Venus Project, ideological forefather to Peter Joseph and former member of the Ku Klux Klan."

As is written by Samuel Gilonis, a university student in journalism (if I'm not mistaken) judging from the comments on his article 'the cult of Zeitgeist.' It's absolutely fascinating to see how a person can approach a certain ideology by not addressing the finer points it makes but by taking (questionable) items and twist them towards negative conclusions. For the uninitiated, this is what happens quite often in regards to the Venus Project and the Zeitgeist Movement. People see an ideology that conflicts on some level with their own and subsequently they reason to such an extent that they find grounds for dismissal, and thus protecting their own view of the world or ideology.

To be fair, the author did try to camouflage his assertion, all be it very poorly, that Jacque Fresco was an ardent follower of the Ku Klux Klan. His final analysis however leads him to conclude that at the very least Fresco tells tall tales. Jacque Fresco tells about that episode in his life here. Me? I take it as anecdotal. I have no reason to believe Jacque Fresco is a racist. His speech about many subjects doesn't point to that direction, quite the contrary. In the grander scheme of things, how does this episode - Fresco's affiliation with 'the Klan' - really matter? In my opinion, the author wants to see some negativity here. The title of his article also rehashes the favorite detractors slogan: 'Zeitgeist is a cult.'

Which speaks volumes for psychology itself, when you really think about it. Here you have an organization, the Zeitgeist Movement with half a million members worldwide, activist arm of the Venus Project, that advocates using science and technology for social concern (not religion), and we are thrown in the mixer to look like the Jim Jones sect. This isn't simply going from A to B, this is going from A to Z through the obstructed maze that is ones mind. Mental barriers seemingly deflect and garble the original message.

"At one point in the film Joseph adopts mock indignation at how people could possibly brand his doctrine communism or socialism."

Yes, that scene can be found right here. The ultimate irony is that it fits the bill smack-dead on in how some people approach the movie or how they 'translate' the message. Samuel Gilonis could have billboarded that section seeing how his comments culminate in the same type of frenzy. He proceeds in the "ism" direction although the movie clearly states that we should move beyond any "ism" and embrace life value analysis. Move away from inequality in any way, shape or form and focus on the necessities of life itself because everything else divides us. Is that really cultish or is it a holistic approach for the welfare of the planet and everyone on it? Sam, oddly enough we are not about establishing a new Politburo or any kind of fascist NWO state. We are about freedom, equality and wising up as a species.

"Whatever way you cut it – this is utopianism."

You moron Utopianist. That's what it boils down to and that's what Peter Joseph highlighted in the movie Zeitgeist Moving Forward. We are disillusioned somehow, for not accepting the world as it is and for wanting something better. It is in fact harmful according to Gilonis because that quest for betterment leads to situations like in Stalin's Russia or Mao's China. We go in the mental mixer and we are back to communism again. We conveniently forget all the hardships capitalism brought and we focus on a negative mentally contrived concoction.

It comes down to psychology and ideology. Samuel Gilonis proves this beyond a shadow of a doubt by making associations in his mind and projecting fear and failure should we adopt something like the Venus Project. Maybe the most remarkable thing here is the wide range of perceptions. Some see the ultimate worst and some see great potential but we are basically arguing over something that is not a reality. I think both sides can agree that wanting to improve our world is a noble endeavor no matter what ideology you might possess.