Observation on The Zeitgeist Movement

I've been watching and listening to Peter Joseph for the past while now. I remember first seeing him and thinking that he made a lot of sense, which he does, but I do have some concerns over what I consider to be missing elements.

First of all, I think The Zeitgeist Movement is a great thing. If anything, Zeitgeist gives a different perspective to commonly established belief systems. I think that was the whole point of it in the first place, but some people took it to mean something else. In any case, it's all starting to create a momentum of change which is a good thing considering that the current system is flawed and will continue to cause disaffection, inequality, separation and scarcity. I think the whole "Resource Based Economy" is nice and everything but there are things that I'm not clear on.

For example, if work becomes fully automated, what will people do? I was watching this video where Peter Joseph talks to Joe Rogan, and Mr. Rogan poses the question to Mr. Joseph for which he gave a vague and unclear answer. Then again, Mr. Rogan was busy spouting off his own thing and interrupting Peter Joseph while he was trying to answer his question. I mean, I know what I would do if I didn't have to work, and it wouldn't be sitting at home watching the days pass by. In any case, what people will do in this economy is one point that is unclear to me.

The other point of question with Zeitgeist is that it doesn't say how to respond to people's reaction to a new mode of living without money. Frankly, I would be glad as hell to have money removed from the equation and given time to take on this new society, but not everyone is as understanding or capable of making such a transition. I remember Alex Jones talking about "re-education", which I think is completely false and not what Zeitgeist talks about. But I do wonder how people will transition. I suppose that if everyone found out the truth about money and the Federal Reserve and planned obsolescence and what have you, then they may see the light, but others may not. How do you instruct? Or rather, how would you respond to such a change? Again, it's not made clear.

My main concern with this is that it does not teach or demonstrate love. Now, I'm not talking about soupy sappy syrupy love, but love of one's self and of others and the nature around them. I don't think it's enough to say that we're all one planet and one species. I know that it is true but other people don't see it that way. A lot of people are programmed to "look out for number one" or are just not keen on the idea of all of humanity being one and being part of the planetary essence. In fact, a lot of people just think that other people are stupid, and trees are just things that are in the way. You think they're going to jump on the humanity train and just start accepting everything and everyone? I don't think so. I wish that they could do that, but let's be honest - they won't. Some will have some sort of baggage they're still carrying from some trauma in their life, others will still be holding onto limiting and outdated religious beliefs that only serve to separate rather than unite. I tell you, these people won't be all that excited about the idea of all of us being united as a species or planet because they don't really care.

Then again, how do you teach someone love? How do you teach someone acceptance, especially if they don't believe in such concepts? Do you want to know how many people I've seen wearing a shirt that says "Fuck Love"? How do you get them to gel with the idea of a Resource Based Economy and no money and an acceptance of humanity as one species living in harmony and oneness?

I believe that there are things that transcend logic. I think it's evident. Love, I believe, is one of those things. The last thing I want to see is people living in a society where all their needs are taken care of, but there is no love. You can have all the scientific data and all the research in the world and all the facts neatly stacked up right next to each other, and that's all great and wonderful, but what about love? What of the love for one's self? You can't start loving anything or creating any kind of change if you don't love yourself.

Louise Hay once said, "Loving yourself is not vanity or arrogance. That is always fear", and it makes sense to me. I would hate to think that The Zeitgeist Movement is impersonal and doesn't take into account the facet of love. We can learn a lot of things when we start to love and care for ourselves and one another. Breaking down the barriers of socio-economic class and all other barriers takes not just courage, but love as well, for what good is bringing down barriers if you're still going to live autonomously within the new system? One thing I've learned from Zeitgeist is that you can look at a problem for so long before you start to wonder what a solution might be. Honestly, it gets tiring to hear and see the same rhetoric of problems over and over and over again. I believe that no change in the world can happen if there isn't an element of love in what you're doing.



Wählen Sie hier Ihre bevorzugte Anzeigeart für Kommentare aus und klicken Sie auf „Einstellungen speichern“ um die Änderungen zu übernehmen.
Fr, 03/16/2012 - 7:13PM | You must be new. Your first (Ergebnis: 1)
Fr, 03/16/2012 - 7:24PM | Regarding the issue of what (Ergebnis: 1)
Fr, 03/16/2012 - 9:45PM | A way to think of the RBE (Ergebnis: 1)
Sa, 03/17/2012 - 1:27AM | Simple way to find the (Ergebnis: 1)
Sa, 03/17/2012 - 3:48AM | hi jacob - i'm glad you (Ergebnis: 1)