Zeitgeist: Addendum and The Venus Project hoax

i just want to give one example about how stupid our system is. A simple one.
We have in cities portion of land that are allocated to a green space. We grow grass and trees and decorative flowers. In the same time we have population of homeless and families living under the poverty line. Grass! why do we grow grass and not vegetables and fruits? And trees that bare fruits. This is for me not a green space but an environmental waste and disaster.
And finally communism was also a monetarist system read Das Capital from Karl Marx. He had a problem with a privilege elitist monetary system but not a collective one. We could say that he was one of the ongoing evolution that is part of the venus project. About the idea that we are naturally selfish and nature is. I can give you many example were species help each other and form very strong relations were their survival depends on it. Nature is not that straight forward. Open your eyes and go to your garden and you will see many relations. Example bees and flowers and many many others.

I knew you were going to mention bees (whom are becoming extinct). But we are mammals, not altruistic insect drones.

If you ever dabble in genetics there is a selfish reason why insects act the way they act (e.g. one hive will attack another hive).

And as you know, money naturally evolves from barter, any form of barter.

It goes to show how blind the fiat system has made you that to you “Survival of the fittest” is synonomus with “survival of the most selfish”. Selfishness ignites when a human either sees that there nececities for survival are met, or doesn’t; never the less continues to ravage and plunder for their own entertainment. To me “survival of the fitest” mean “survival of the wisest”

I dont think people are naturaly greedy we are just F@#$ed in the head from the greedy jelous world we live in . . I like to belive that it is possible for us to shed our materialistic ways and in stead of power & stuff maybe we could lust for compassion and wisdom we are all in this togeather weather you like it or not .

I have to agree with ‘nobody’, I believe it is extremely possible to shed our materialistic ways, plant teachings are a very good way to do this.

It is possible to create abundant power, look at the world 70% of it’s covered in water, more so if global warming continues (lol)

Water is ever flowing due to the tides, this would generate a hell of allot of power world wide, giving everyone electricity etc Thus with this continuos flow of energy, you won’t loose out on your luxuries if you feel you need them! Many of you probably own a CD player, computer, games console etc if you look after it it shouldn’t really need replacing

With this harnessed natural power (water/hydro electricity), we would eliminate the fossil fuel industry thus economy and competition between countries would become near enough obsolete.

In the case of artistic and scientific advancement if the individual desires to do it they wouldn’t need money to be the promoting tool, they would do it for the advantages of others, their own personal pleasure and learning and if it was truly good or worth sharing or beneficial or entertaining to others logic says they would distribute it for free

“Humans by nature are greedy. If we weren’t the species wouldn’t be here.”

-What? Really? Is that really what would happen if humans were not greedy? We would no longer exist? That is an interesting hypothesis.

“Survival of the fittest” is polite and scientific way of saying “survival of the most selfish.””

Absolutism is the biggest danger here.

I am lost for words. Awesome display of mindpower,Victory to you!

To go with your first point about home size; people only want mansions because they’re taught to compete with the world, and that is a symbol of success. When that symbol is stripped of its value, what use will people have for these homes?

I’m guessing most people will spend their lives traveling in this system.

Great point on the “unknown direction” of human nature, btw.

It is a HUMAN ISSUE. To me that is the biggest point. This world is hurting our people, we are all ONE kind.
Big houses do symbolize money and success! If we teach ourselves and our children not to value things only because of how much they are worth in dollars and appeal, and to appreciate things for what they are worth in evolution, love and quality of life perhaps the world’s state of mind can start to change. I love the idea of traveling. Wonder the world, seeking your ambitions. Throughout history doctors, scientists, artists and many other useful “occupations” have been born out of interest, not financial gain. Us humans, and the planet we live on, have so much more potential to offer then what we’ve been demonstrating

It’s only us that give anything value. Power is only valuable because WE give it value. Gandhi proved that concept with a no violence stance and he ended up making one of the biggest impacts in history.

This movie makes genuinely valid points, it’s not perfect, but like Jacque Fresco says, we will never achieve perfection, although we should always try. This movie has got my attention since I watched it. I’ve though about all the points it makes, searched the internet ad nauseum for feedback. The sad thing is that nobody offers another solution instead of The Venus Project. Instead, they criticize it for all it’s flaws (and it is a human concept, there is always flaws!). Not a single alternative. I find that extremely sad that people would rather hate this and burn the idea down than say “wait a minute, if we were to change a few fundamental ideas in this concept, it would be easier to achieve, or more realistic”.

I’m sure if we all participated in a giant information collecting project,with everybody’s input, we’d eventually get to the best possible concept of a redesign, because of we can’t all agree with this movie or it’s ideas, I’m pretty sure we can all agree that we need a well thought out change in our societies!

I agree, the problem is we are all too caught up in trying to survive and make money just to scrape by that we are missing what will really start improving the global society. Education and philosophy – then action will begin to lessen and eradicate the problems we have.
but the vast majority of people lack the vision to improve our world, expand and better concepts like the venus project, they instead just say that it wont work as it is and resist any form of change. alot of people hate change – they would rather live a familiar but more oppressed life than accept change and make the effort now in order to enjoy a more recreational lifestyle later.
change is good, education is good, thinking is good – so why does everyone hate it? honestly what percentage of school going kids do you think actively enjoy going to school for the learning opportunities they have there? not many, the main concern is getting money to get “stuff” that will improve their popularity and thus their influence and power – this is the attitude we are breeding right now, the focus needs to change, we need to stop valueing power and start valuing knowledge so that we might enjoy sharing it to improve the world.

Knowledge Is Power My Freind

I agree fully. Why does our sosiety not realize the harm done when we make education boring, And reward materialism in our schools?

I agree that the project is not realistic for the most proximate future. But for the next hundreds of years..? I think this could certainly be A FUTURE.

Someone said here that the assumption that the Earth will always have resources for us, humankind ,no matter how much we multiply , is an absurdity.Of course we all agree. HOWEVER, if you do some research on the Zeitgeist nmovement, you will see that THEY DON’T CLAME THIS. They say something else: at the present stage of our development, we are worrying more and more about overpopulation , because our only possibility is living on land. HOWEVER,the biggest percentage of the planet is not land , but WATER. Solution : with the advance of science and technology it will become possible to construct floating cities, and cities under water. That will expand our possibilities for survival, and meanwhile ,by having access to more education , and by learning to care for Earth and our species, we will reduce our natality gradually, to a greater and greater extent. Hence, to sum up , the solutions to overpopulation proposed by Zeitgeists are simple:

1.With new technology expand human habitat to waters
2.With new technology recycle Earth’s resources in a more efficient way
3.Give access to a strong education to all
4.Diminish natality level.

So now people, why wouldn’t we give this a thought? What is the other alternative? War and disease to raise our mortality rate?!?

Also, i would like to comment on the need of a regulator aparatus (law, governments, police) .

If you read Hitler’s Mein Kampf , he was pretty right in his analyses of the stratification of human society, and of the mob philosophy. To simplify things , he said that the “people” were generally composed of two elements:the high intelectuals , who have superior abilities ,a sharp critical thinking ,are able to make decissions ,and are hard to manipulate,and the big mass of people, “the mob” who go with the wind of the strongest leadership and follow one another. Since of the multitude of the people only a small percentage are vigilent, and able to make responsible decisions, than you can not trust the “people” . You need to give them , Hitler thought , strong leadership, and the stronger the better, because if not in their stupidity and ignorance they would ruin the whole civilization in short time. Then , in talking about propaganda , he again sais that propaganda and control of information must be directed towards “the mob”, they are the target, and not the high thinkers(who are able to see the world for themselves and on whom this doesn’t have a big effect). So you see where I am going with this?…

The people will have a chance to really govern themselves , as the dream of democracy has been at the beginnings, when they will stop being the “blind , ignorant mob “, and start respecting themselves,and imposing themselves as a vigilent entity. When the small minority of thinkers will become the big majority, that is when our prospects will be different. The KEY here is EDUCATION !

To continue my last comment , education is the key. The reason why we were never able to imagine a world without a centralized government is because until today the great masses of people were always uneducated. Today ,the Western societies offer a wide spread opportunity for basic education , and this has lead certainly to progress. However , even so, the ratio of the educated to the less educated is not semnificative enough. We still have a lot of improvement to do. But today it’s starting to be possible ,for the first time , to have a realistic lead of “the people”.

And ATTENTION!! The same Western culture that facilitates people access to education facilitates them access to a couple of other stuff…Our absurd cult of celebrities (who are really only famous and rich,nothing more… Many of them are UNDER the average intelectual level , and PEOPLE , the MOBS of today take them as models ) , the “culture within a culture”, (as I called it) of our youth ,who judge and regulate each other on the concept of “cool” vs “nerd” , the tv shows that promote ignorance as opposed to critical thinking and mental progress, the extreme violent movies (by-poduct of a society that puts PROFITS above PEOPLE),pornography infecting the WWW …Should I go on? Fashion dictating women everywhere what to wear, people preffering to watch “the movie” instead of reading “the book”, the trend to conformity even when strangely naming it “noncomformism” etc etc.When they vote for their president many are so ignorant that they don’t try to analyse the programs propossed by the canditates, they in fact have no knowledge of what the agenda of their future leaders might be , but often choose to vote on criterias such as “popularity” . ETC. ETC.

The educated people of today are more numerous than in the past, but the people,you see, are still the ignorant mob. It is this mob that has he ultimate power, but it needs to wake up from its “sleep-walking” state. If we do away with the useless trash of our culture simply and firmly , and we teach the big majority to think clearly and freely, we might just get one day , in the future, a time where people will only need themselves to rule and regulate their resources and interactions.

But remember : the key is EDUCATION. Period.

perhaps u nid to re-define ur education coz coming to grips with how the current system operates has a posibility of bringing about ways to manipulate it for one’s benefit despite the destruction it may cause. what is important is what u do with ur life-long process of aquiring knowledge and skills. being cultured on benovalent intentions is the key, education is one of teeth of that key.

I am fully agreeing people. Only black spot in the picture is what our current governments ( EU, USA..) are doing with our education and independent research programs/institution.
Look up on the web how many independant research labs are currently “re-organized” (= diminuished, closed, appovrished, and devaluated) all over the world, in order to give research (and through it, the future technologies) a more “applyed” (= profit oriented) dimension. In clear: research is officially re-oriented in order to work hand in hand with the industry, and through this to generate more profits, by giving the intellectual outcome brought by thousand of people originally aiming at improving general knowledge to profit generating industries, and this for free. In parallel, areas not generating profits (ex: environmental sciences, ecology, social sciences, etc, etc….) are slowly abondonned (except for highly polemic topics of course). But how do you wanna save/adapt/conserve/develop/improve/(…) things, if you do not really understand them ?(e.g., stop biodiversity erosion without understanding the relation between species, or between our actions, their consequences and the impact they will have on diversity?)

Education in our schools goes the same way, through appovrishment of the content of the programs, and unequal access to education and knowledge depending on where in the big city of your “civilsed and developped” country you grew up.
In France for example, education and research currently see their subvensions droping for the benefits of military and interior security. Less and less teacher or researcher positions are available, but there are more and more policemen in the streets (to look after the kids who could not learn and get a proper education in the overcrowed schools?). Here the current policy is repression and violence, instead of education and free knowledge.

The Key IS education, but education for everybody is becoming more threatened than ever in the frame of the current politic, with a regression of the quality of education and a limitation of the topics explored by independant researchers.
So much for educating the “mob” and developping really usefull new technologies…..

I agree with on the point about incentive.however,I would like to draw your attention to the fact that the barter system does not come with interest & inflation or money created from thin air.

I watched the flim recently & it was incredible to me to realise that there are other people out there who find capitalism to have failed in reality.

My concern with the Venus project is, incentive & the wide spread-ness of the Technology.

Not all people need to be motivated, only the ones that are can make a great difference as long as that is what everyone wants. There is already a lot o volunteers working on this idea. Incentive is not necessary money. You and I are writing and debating here without being paid, only because we each believe something and we want something to come out of it, we want to add our 2 cents If only a small part of the population is willing to donate time, which I think they will be, then the other part can just do whatever, be creative in their own way or do nothing. What would you personally do everyday if you were not working? Play golf, go to the beach then what. If you do too much of the same things then it becomes boring no matter how fun it was at first eventually you will add your little contribution to society without even trying.

sue, is thoughtful of u 2 remind us that we r nt paid for commentin and debating on this issue but we stil find the nid to kip on pushing. my worry on vp is that, we want to live as comfortable as possible, seeking technology to relief humans from the rigor of work. this wil bring about dependance on technology hence dependance on the inventors. that alone gives them “power” in a way to decide the future of our future. thats potentially dangerous. i just see the part of vp as the shift of power which wil ugur semilar chaos the millenium after next, should it prevail on the next.

Living as comfortably as possible the most important thing to you? Sounds like a weak lifestyle, your primary motivator being the avoidance of anything that might make you uncomfortable. How easy people who live like that are to manipulate.

And as for who holds the power, I’d give it to the technicians before I’d ever hand it over to the lawyers that hold it now.

@Young Biko: “I would like to draw your attention to the fact that the barter system does not come with interest & inflation or money created from thin air.”

There’s an extraordinarily good apple harvest this year, and the world as a whole produces 2x more apples then it did last year. Assuming people are still able to communicate in this new utopia, people will know that there are more apples this year, and because of this your apple is now worth less then it used to be. That means it has less purchasing power. Oh gee, isn’t that the definition of inflation?

Things only have value if we GIVE them value, let it be money, food, raw materials, etc. It only has value because we VALUE the item.

holy crap. you may be 100% right

About the tabacco companies paying for the TRUTH commercials. They were ordered by the courts to do so.

Exactly People Want What They Can’t Have

Yes ‘kelar’ – we are indeed programmed from the cradle into desiring things we really don’t need – this is the nature of our current system of consumerism. Maybe it should be as simple as having to do some work or good deeds to get things you don’t need . I think a resource based economy should only provide a certain standard of living (high enough to eliminate most of todays problems) and if you really feel the need to show off (which will probably become a social taboo anyway) then you can work your arse off & look ridiculous . People from birth should enter society on a level footing and perhaps age 18 all receive the same house/car etc. Then you can choose without any pressure at all whether to go to University (free) for 10 years or work for a special paint job on your car/house etc. Technology means that ALL cars are amazing , as is everyones wide screen TV , house etc. THIS IS THE POINT – when you already have the best because technology has reached that point and can go no further only limited artistic enhancements matter , which is a totally personal thing anyway . If you’re happy with your (good) education & stuff at age 18 then by all means sit on your front porch drinking free beer all day (which is inexpensive to produce anyway once the tax is removed) but that is your choice & people wont resent you like today , rather think you are funny not wanting to do/learn anything else. I think i would probably drink beer all night but then want to do something constructive or creative the next day and be appreciated for it – coz in the future it’s what you VOLUNTEER to do with your days that will get you the Babe .

if people get an even footing at 18 all you are doing is starting the same system again as the “materially” minded individuals will collect and save and become progressively better off it is the standard of living in its self the need to always better the way in which you live that is the problem. and at the moment the only solution to the environmental crisis is to simply lower the global living standard. greed is the only real problem with today’s way of living and that is what i really like about this idea(an idea is all it will ever be) it shows us that we can find alternatives to the this corrupt system we live in today.

YOUR TV AND CAR ETC ONLY NEEDS TO DO AND BE SO MUCH WHY PARTICIPATE IN THE YUPPIE RAT RACE. i blame the “rich kids” that rule the worlds through the banks.

is that the machines take over or what? aah-ah, if there is a fomula for computing and selecting the decisions then sumbady put it in place to favour him. if nt, let every human partake in the construction of the formula to ensure everyone’s representation. if this is impossible them the is purely a hoax and a pathetic one for that matter. i suggest u watch that video(ur source) critically AD.

i agree, any system can be cheated, abused the internet and its abundance of viruses and other negative thinngs should be enough proof not to put all that responcibility in the hands of a machine that will never be more perfect than the floored human’s that made it

what if humans were the computers made by a advanced civilization

I think movies like terminator and the matrix were made to stifle the invention of AI.

It was actually deregulation of the financial system – actually a lack of legal control by government that caused the current flop- or the extreme nature of its bubble bursting at least.
Which actually was exascerbated by the medias insistence on a credit crunch! for months beforehand and the palming off of bad debts for a few years into the portfolios of the unwise.
credit crunch!?! what the feck does that mean anyway? its econopsychobabble- just a propogation of fear i presume,
all this was done in the pursuit of growth,
in the current climate a “healthy” economy is one that grows,
to put it simply -continuous economic growth assumes endless resources, the earth has only so much resource ergo it was going to go tits up at some point, the confidence trick of everyone can have it all has worn out and we reap what we have sown. admittedly we have made technological advancements that would have not been possible otherwise but 40% of the money is in the pockets of 1%, poverty is growing and the skeletons in the closet are beginning to whiff.
a resource based economy is inevitable by hook or crook because of the finite size and resource the earth has to offer, it would however be better if this came about peacably via discussion rather than squeezing the last drops out of an earth and an economy thats had it already.
get a grip? you should wind yer neck in.

“That, my friend, is fascim”

Technically By Definition Everyone Here (Expressing Thear Opinions) Are Fascists

We Will Never Live In This Utopian Society It Dosent Mater How Much We Complain That The Current System Dose Not Work It’s The People With The Money (Whom You All Hate So Adamantly) That Have The Power To Change Things, The Minority Will Never Change Anything

If only 1% owns 40% of the nation’s money, then the rich are, by definition, the MINORITY. So if the MINORITY cannot change anything, the PEOPLE WITH THE MONEY would not be able to change anything, according to your logic. But you state that they are the only ones who can change things. I suggest you rework your logic.

Btw, the other 99% without the money is the MAJORITY, so, according to your logic, they are the only ones who can change things.

Greetings…!!

First of all let describe my position regarding to this so you can make a informed judge.

I consider myself a deep philosopher and I believe most of the ideas mentioned in “Zeitgeist” since I can remember…

However there are righteous points on both sides, so I’ll try to be impartial on my opinion…

The capitalist arguments ARE VERY STRONG in general, and thats why they have sticked for so long, because our nature makes us by design ambitious and it’s quite logical if you have in mind that as an imperfect species that we are we will never be absolutely happy with anything because we will always want more than we already achieved…

However, for our own good we should find another system of society (whether the stated in Venus Project or any other) fast because it’s proven that the current Capitalist system it’s destroying us as a hole, and it’s having us destroying the natural resources of the planet, not to mention the barbarities that we have been making to other Species on the Planet and even to the Planet itself…!!

It’s simply an issue of resource management because the current system promotes competition and self preservation and also other forms of individualism, and the reason why that’s not good is because we can only evolve faster if we do it as a Hole (referring to Human Specie).

One of the main issues discussed in here is the use of technology and energy production
and how it could affect our evolution, first of all the idea that unlimited and renewal Energy wouldn’t solve most of our problems is RIDICULOUS… Think about it, with more energy you can improve technology using less resources witch in turn would drastically reduce pollution and the use and destruction of natural resources also sparing the environment of the atrocities we currently practice…

As a matter a fact, if we where ever visited by aliens, I’m quite sure they did it with advanced energy production systems, because such a long journey using the amount of matter that we use to produce the energy required would be unsustainable not to even say IMPOSSIBLE…

Finally I also must say that most of the topics I read in this page was referring to ideologies that where conceived at the image of the “Institutionalized Powers” that we where trained by our environmental variables (Family, Religion, Geopolitical situation, Etc…) to respect, so it’s hard for us to even try to understand even more embrace such changes to the hole society system, but anyway most of us should at least try to have some critical thinking about where are we leading the future of our kind because you discuss “how much one’s going to lose an so one” and “the individual rights” and “Who as the right to make decisions…” well forgive me for my presumption but that’s a little bit irrelevant because if we destroy the Planet so bad putting ourselves in the urge of Extinction believe me, this matters will be pitiful compared to the REAL PROBLEMS WE ARE ABOUT TO FACE…

It’s a cultural issue that affects us all, so we should try to be more constructive if we really want to create a system that is better that the current one, because one thing is UNDENIABLE the system we have today it is not a sustainable reliable system, witch is what we need if we want to survive as a Species…

Thank you for reading this…
I’ll appreciate any comments…

I very much enjoyed your post.

I think everyone needs to keep in mind that we have all been born into this current society, with it’s current values and beliefs. It is important that before you make such points as “Greed is human nature” and “People will always want power” you stop and thinks about this.

You must consider that in a new society education from an early age about “the important issues” will need to take place and could remove these negative behaviors.

Cheers

who will be deciding what “the important issues” are?

The point is that the important issues have already been decided for us through our collective actions up to this point in time. Quite simply, the important issue is the continued, sustainable survival of humanity and all the natural systems that sustain it.
Economics is a human invention- nature is not. Guess which one we are ultimately subservant to.

There ARE enough resources for everyone, provided they are managed efficiently, and technology is the only practical way to do this. Of course, individuals will have to evolve psychologically, and shift their priorities, values, and become mature beings, rather than selfish, self-destructive consumers.
The important thing to keep in mind is that such a system ultimately allows for greater individual freedom, provided that freedom works towards the functioning of the whole.

What must be remembered is that this is not simply about resource USE, but resource CREATION- ultimately all our products will become ‘nutrients’ for some other aspect of the process.

Look, you are raising valid points- from a fairly limited perspective, and i don’t mean that as an insult. It’s just that your worldview seems to be stuck in the scarcity\individualist loop. If you really begin to grasp the principles behind the concept of the VP (not necessarily its as-concieved-of execution) then you would see that most of your arguments simply don’t apply.

Let’s examine them:

1)”Will there be enough of the best quality items for everyone?”

First, the notion of superior and inferior quality will no longer be dependent upon something akin to price, ie. you get what you pay for. Quality is always a function of design in conjunction with material, and these factors are what the new production system is constantly improving upon, as a matter of its standard operating proceedure.
Second, demand will drive production, and production will be localized and individually controlled, so it is YOU who determines what you want and how much of it you need, not some monolithic central authority mass producing a constant stream of standardized toothbrushes, etc.

2)”Will everything be produced on demand or is there a lead time?”

See above. Yes, eveything will be produced on demand, provided there is enough energy and material (which is built into the system as its foundation).

3)”What if I just change my mind, am I allowed to trade my allocation?”

There are no allocations, since this pressuposes again a scarcity view. Since each and every product will be fully industrio-degradable there is essentially no waste, and you can change you mind about something as often as you like. When you are done with a product it will be broken down into its constituent parts and reformed into something new.

4)”Will there be a market or will I be prosecuted for commercialization?”

No one will prevent you from setting up a market, but what would be the point? Again, a market exists to (theoretically) efficiently distribute goods and services among producers and consumers in order to generate profit, whereas under VP once the profit aspect is eliminated we will see the undistorted principle of self-organization begin to operate, and this will most effectively distribute resources where they need to go.

5)”What happens to all the excess bananas?”

The same thing that happens in nature- they become fertilizer for other plants.

6)”Do you really trust a central authority to control the plant species, they will inevitably eliminate genetic variations in the food supply that could cause diseases to wipe out entire crops…”

This is a reflection of your limited understanding. There is no central authority, nor does there need to be one. A society of equally free individuals functions by entering into agreements with other members, not by rules, laws, or force.
You seem to operate under the assumption that the only way things can efficiently get done is either through some strong-arm dictator or else through a kind of social homogenization (as per your reference to 1984). This is simply not the case when you realize that VP represents the technological tools and operating principles that define nature, put into the hands of INDIVIDUALS- not corporations, not states or governments, but you and I.

7)”How do we handle failures in the supply chain?”

No one is saying this will be utopia- quite the opposite in fact! Utopias are by their very nature stagnant, resistant to change and therefore brittle and highly suseptible to collapse. The vision proposed under the Venus Project is as far from utopian as one can get. It is based on flexibility and adaptability, interlocking cycles of production and use, distributed through self-aware, self-organizing intelligent networks. Imagine the internet in 3-D. Failures will be adapted to when they occur, and minimized by rigorous analysis, planning, and efficient organization, not through draconian control regulations.

8)”What happens if a yield isn’t as expected and we can’t deliver on our promises?”

This basically sums up your view of the world: limitations, schedules, deadlines, bottom lines, contracts, and punishments when all doesn’t go according to plan. None of these things will realistically exist in the new system, because there simply is no NEED for them.

Anyways, hope this stimulates you thinking on the subject.

Cheers.

Is it just me or are you missing a huge point, there is not nearly enough hospitable land for us to live in and grow enough crops for us all already and your proposing to cover up more land with solar pannels ?

Your saying humans are not smart ? You have not seen anything to prove that we are intelegent ? Do you not see the keyboard you are typing on? Are you not aware of the huge network you are connected to alowing us to have this conversation?

first off if you watched the movie they did speak of buildings in the water. that means the ocean. also we can go to space. going above and beyond is it not possible that with no halter of science that we could go and live in space including other planets i mean if you havent looked at any science books then you should know that they belive its very possible to live on mars.also he means more adaptable which in turn makes them smart we grew and worked away with the land and plants and animals worked with it. what your doing is using semantics if you couldent quite understand what he had to say dont comment

I have an idea of how we can start this with very little start up capitol. If we invent a robot that can cultivate the resources required to build factories that build robots that can build factories that build robots that can build cities we theoretically only need to build one factory. If anyone is familiar with the game “Starcraft” you’ll see where I am coming from. So all we need is the startup capitol to pay the inventors and engineers to design and build the first robot factory and then the process should do everything on its own. It shouldnt take long before we can start moving people into these selfmade cities. Then all we have to worry about is the protoss and the zerg destroying our supply depots. Its so simple. It came to me last night when I was playing video games.

you are a crackpot.

Generally, better educated people who live middle class lifestyles have fewer children than poverty-stricken people. Perhaps, increasing the education and standard of living for all who can benefit from it will be the least painful solution to a potential overpopulation crisis.

Come on do you think capitalism is working!!! Our planet is just about dead, over half of the world lack basic food and shelter, and things are just getting worse and worse. It is time to say IT’S BROKE. It is time to say let’s look around and find a solution, and dare I say it maybe a new system to live under. The Venus project people should be praised for doing just that. I have seen the videos and they do raise some good points. I don’t agree with everything they say but that’s cool. Greed is taught to us from the day we are born. It is not a normal human condition. Otherwise why do anything for no money. We cannot go on the way we are going and that is a fact. Stalinism died and so it should have. Capitalism is dieing and so it should. We don’t need either of these anymore. THEY DO NOT WORK. LET’S FIND SOMETHING THAT DOES BEFORE IT’S TOO LATE!

did you even watch the film?
economic hitmen anybody?
“what does capitalism have to do with poverty in the third world?”
answer: absolutely everything from its cause to continued oppression, using national debt, export of resources and any other means necessary just look at the DR CONGO at the moment western capitalist entities looting the country whilst it is at war,
oh and the commercial availability of guns of the free market? not capitalisms fault of course, problem is you people who are trained from birth it seems to worshiop the economy and see it for the technology it isnt.
capitalism always seems to take the credit for stuff but never takes the blame, people get the blame for stuff even though the people make up the capitalist system!

you are souless mr nopoint.
if you cant see how capitalism is a system within which imperialism thrives and is almost encouraged by,
leading us to a point in history where we have a successful empire once again and capitalism and war profiteering are the means by which this empire is maintained.
A RESOURCED BASED ECONOMY IS AN INEVITABILITY.
whether its a mad max style place where the currency is violence because of scarcity or a reasonably fair and peacable place where the scarcity is factored in is up to us to decide.
capitalism is based on the principles of competition at the expense of every other human philosophy, even that of cold logic and common sense that states the earth is finite in size and therefore capitalism was always going to reach a point where the expansion of economy would run into the inescapable fact that at some point we are going to run out of stuff!
a point a five yearold can probably understand.
wake up.

nobody is capable, were all gonna die, there is no hope, cheer up will you,
It seems indoctrinated pessimism and the cynical points of view are going to be the biggest stumbling blocks if we are to succeed in changing the current economic method,
If we dont we will end up being forced to change when the situation forces us to do so, your cynicism will be self-fulfilling and it will be environmental disaster and self imposed scarcity, over demand for resource and that old favourite companion of human history- war that eventually wake us up to the importance of continued human existence and the planet over individual gain and wealth.
wake up and smell the coffee, believe it or not its sustainable and doesnt actually need a plastic wrapper, or an advert,or shareholders, or a fancy machine to make it.

“I don’t believe VP enhances freedom because it concentrates even more power in the hands of people who we know are not trustworthy. People with high IQ tend to be idealistic by nature and the biggest mistake we can make it to project our idealism on a very average species. You have to remember that half the human race has less than 100 IQ.”

First off, people with a high IQ would prosper no more than those without such an IQ, because the system would not discriminate against anyone’s right to equality. Second, why do you think half the human race only has an IQ below 100? It is because of the inequality that the current global system promotes. Only those who have the means have access. However, in a society which promotes equality among all, everyone would have that access, and therefore would be of virtually equal intelligence (obviously naturally gifted individuals may prosper in certain fields, however everyone would have access to the same material).

“Ahhh… fundamental disagreement. I smell a nature vs. nurture debate. If you believe that we are all born with equal abilities then we will never come to agreement.”

Well, first off, I believe you missed the ending of my post, as it read; “obviously naturally gifted individuals may prosper in certain fields, however everyone would have access to the same material”. This should show that the inequality I am referring to is one based off inequality access to information and education, not natural ability. I am an a supporter of the idea that people are culturally formed, and that their upbringing and exposure have vast impacts on their abilities down the road, however, I do acknowledge that people do seemed to be naturally inclined towards certain fields of study or abilities.

Mr Tim , I have to disagree with you:

“First off, people with a high IQ would prosper no more than those without such an IQ, because the system would not discriminate against anyone’s right to equality. Second, why do you think half the human race only has an IQ below 100? It is because of the inequality that the current global system promotes. Only those who have the means have access. However, in a society which promotes equality among all, everyone would have that access, and therefore would be of virtually equal intelligence (obviously naturally gifted individuals may prosper in certain fields, however everyone would have access to the same material).”

Er…I think you are missing a few points here. Creating a society that is promoting equality is NOT going to lead to us all having equal IQs (?!). But it would , ideally and hopefully, give equal chances to education to everyone. (Well, to be honest, I doubt that it will work THAT well, but I do think a better society would give education to more people than today…).The point is NOT that all people will be equal in all ways. No. The point is that by having machines do the “lower” work , you are creating a chance for humans to invest their time in science, and creation , and arts . (Like they say in that Zeitgeist brochure:putting today’s girls behind a counter to sell candies, or people to arrange products on shelves in supermarkets , when the human brain IS CAPABLE of SO MUCH MORE is such a waste of human resources! ) This , together with an education system available for free to the vast majority, would lead to a highly superiour society . People would not be equal in the sence that you understand. But the average IQ would be higher.The average level of thought and knowledge of a person would be so much higher. The standards and progress in science would be higher.In arts the same. People could really transform themselves from an ignorant mob into evolved beings , who can focus on discovering and improving the world around them. That is really the point: to rid them of the need to enslave themselves to earn bread and a shelter, and give them security and endless horizons for their minds. We all know that in fact today we ARE using SO LITTLE of our brain , just barely more than 10% .So human minds amight have a chance to get to their full abilities.

This is inspired by maslow’s pyramid ,which sais that at the very bottom are a human’s most basic needs: shelter, food, water etc. When those needs are satisfied he can start aspiring for higher needs, at higher and higher levels of the pyramide. As each level is satisfied he goes on , until in the end he reaches the abstract level . In a VP society there might be a chance that our species could become one of the most evolved and advanced in the universe.

But we’ll see. I don’t make myself illusions that it will happen in our lifetime.

lari,

While I think your intentions are good, I do believe you may have misunderstood my points. I was not stating that everyone would have an exactly equal IQ in the literal sense. What I was implying was essentially what you are in agreement with; that by allowing for equal access to education (and a real education, not the pathetic excuse for an education which our current system promotes), then there will a vast balancing of intelligence amongst the society. In other words, as educational access is equally distributed, we will on the large become a much more intelligent people. Certainly, there will still remain variance within the population, but the level of variance would be so minute compared to what we face today, that it would virtually – and I stress virtually in a figurative sense – cease to exist.

That was my point, and I believe it is not something we would find ourselves in disagreement on.

See, I do not agree, in the sense that I do not believe have a natural desire to trade goods. The only reason people have done it for so long is a direct result of the lack of resources available, and there was seemingly no alternative. But, with today’s technological possibilities, if we were to eliminate this need for a barter system I have no reason to think that humans would maintain this circumstantial desire.

As for your second point, I agree to an extent. There seems to be a very fine line between what would be considered acceptable in our current system in regards to how much is too much. However, I believe you should only attain what you need to sustain yourself in a reasonable way. Subjecting yourself to unnecessary living conditions does not solve anything. However, you can live moderately, and we both know nit-picking at this is not the point here. The issue is how our society has a seemingly unquenchable thrust for more, and people are not simply trying to sustain themselves, but are far to eager to manipulate things to their benefit in unnecessary and greedy ways. That is what I am against.

“Well that’s another fundamental disagreement. I think giving someone an infinite number of apples will not satisfy his libido. He will want women, even if he has to trade his apples to get them. And that’s just one example…”

One thing that I continue to have an issue with is how you jump around some drastically with examples, and in doing so you make them irrelevant… You can not compare a man’s ability to be supplied with apples, and his desire for sex. That is ridiculous. As I have already said, a resource based society would provide a man with free access to necessities, education, technology, etc. It would not control anyone’s access to sex, love, emotion, or yes, happiness. Those, among many other things, would have to be created and acquired just as it would today. The difference however, is that people would all have the ability to seek those things instead of slaving themselves to the perpetual cycle of work, debt and ignorance they have now. Human’s wouldn’t be something that could be bartered for (as they sadly often are now).

“Just saying a VP society will change this doesn’t make it so…”

First of all, I have not just been saying it with no logic behind it. I have explained how I think such a society would eliminate much -if not all – of these human qualities… Greed is a result of people’s mental state. If people feel they need to constantly fight for their ability to maintain or build upon what they currently possess to sustain themselves, of course they are going to become greedy. As I said before, when you live in a society where you become vulnerable the second you stop acquiring more, then it is only natural that you will want to continue to accumulate as much as you can in an effort to solidify your well being. But if you did not have the endless pressure to hoard and hoard as much as you could, simply in an effort to maintain your current state, then there would no longer be any reason to feel threatened (as far as your sustainability would go). Thus, such widespread greed would diminish along with the removal of fears of an inability to sustain yourself.

“they will be willing to trade something they want less (apples) for something they want more (sex)… I mean something you have for something you don’t. That’s just basic human nature”

Now I know you said I shouldn’t take you literally, but since it is in fact the argument you chose to use, I have no other choice but to refute it as it stands. And trust me, I do not, and have not throughout any of my posts, aimed at trying to misrepresent any of you arguments in order to more easily refute them (in short, I am not trying to ‘straw man’ you). Now, back to the good stuff. This is the problem I have with this argument; you are trying to put objects (or anything else that could be ‘traded’ in the most literal sense)on the same level as an action which connects deeply with human emotion and choice (sex). I do not believe this is a viable comparison. If you refer to the action of sex as nothing more than a means of currency to trade – which you indeed currently are – then you are detaching the human emotions from the person how is supplying the action in regards to the situation, and are making them no better than an object; a prostitute. However, such a society would not promote, or even allow for such a thing to happen. Those types of actions occur in our current world out of necessity. Do you honestly believe that woman who act as prostitutes, do it so that they can trade themselves like a piece of meat for something which they already have? No, of course not. They do it because they are desperate in the situation they are in, and have no better means of acquiring the necessities. However, this is exactly what you are claiming. You are saying that you can trade an object for sex, yet as I have just shown you, sex is only traded when access to the desired objects is otherwise unattainable. However, in a society where people have access to all of those objects of necessity, they would no longer be subjected to such an action, therefore nullifying anyone’s need to trade their morals for survival. Thus, such type of bartering would cease to exist.

“Go talk to anybody living in a socialist or communist state, ask them how secure they feel when they are completely dependent on some government beaurocrat to provide them with food and shelter and everything else.”

Again, you miss the point. Not only that, but you make a comparison that is not legitimate. You can not use current communist or socialist states as a away to prove that people don’t like equality, because all of those states are driven by the same things American society is; corruption, greed and power. The reason no communist country has ever succeed is because they are founded upon money, just like every other government that has existed. They are ruled by a few, as is our country, and those few don’t care about the general public at all. So please, stop referring to current corrupt systems as legitimate examples of my views in the real world, because they simply are not even close and I would hope you are smarter than that.

Also, as I have said NUMEROUS times, I do not – I repeat, do NOT – support a centralized power or government. I have told you many times before, that I stand behind a true democracy; a government controlled by votes of equally informed citizens, where each vote is weighted equally among them. That is why people in such a society would not have to listen to ‘the man’ tell them how many bananas they can eat (I know you love that expression). Rules and regulations – if there needed to be some – would come from a true majority vote of all informed citizens. therefore, the society itself could decide what is best for it. And if that means that food has to begin to be rationed becuase of a lack of supply (which I dont think it would, but will use it as an extreme example), then everyone will receive the same rations. Thus equality will remain. And please don’t use your idea that people are naturally not equal argument, because it is weak. Even if people are not naturally equal in intelligence, that does not take away from the fact that they are equal when it comes to what kind of, and how many resources they need to survive.

Wow. I’m not sure I really wanted to bother commenting. “point” – you seem like you’ve made your decision. Not all can be expected to care about their fellow man.

“Again, you are assuming that people understand all the issues they are faced with, they don’t, because they’re stupid.”

One of the largest points which the VP seeks is to increase educational options for individuals globally – to reduce the amount of these ‘stupid’ people you seem to think surround you. I’ve got to admit, the growth of blissful ignorance in our generation is shocking in many ways. Education is our most viable hope at solving some of the biggest issues our world will face.

Also, people who ‘fix’ or ‘make’ the machines will not need this ‘monetary’ repayment – they will be driven by their passions and skills. A lot of people LIKE to make stuff – and ENJOY fixing things. Some people like to garden – others like to clean. We can pursue are true passions while enhancing the world around us.

I’ll leave you with one parting remark or example as it may be.

Did Captain Kirk get paid to explore the universe? I think he just did it because it was a great freaking adventure and a large challenge – he didn’t do it for the cash .

But, I’m sure you’ll come back with arguments that attack my ideological stance or something.

The Venus Project does seem to be a step in the right direction, hopefully we can pursue it before it is too late. We won’t have a chance to regret it.

Flabbergahsted. Your negativity beggars belief point! You state ‘There is absolutely no evidence that people have the slightest clue what needs to be done today to prevent tommorows problems.’ Can you even begin to grasp the enormity of your blinkered stupidity. Your opinion is truly terrifying.

I think that here you are making your most poignant and incisive critiques, and i would like to try to address some of them.

Regarding this idea of fairness and equality- you are right on the money(no pun intended) when you say that these two terms cannot be conflated. Your examples of food and medical care are perfect illustrations of this precept. What i would like to put forward, and which i feel the ideals behind the VP is advocating, is moreso the notion of equality of access, rather than equality of service. I think we can agree, hopefully, that all people deserve equal access to medical care, even though how they will be treated (fairness) depends on their direct needs. The same would hold true for food. Any system which provides equal access to foodstuffs, regardless of differing needs, can be considered fair.
So how then do these disequalities between people across a whole range of factors, such as intelligence, aptitude, and the like, realistically achieve equilibrium under VP?
This is indeed the flaw behind all previous attempts to engineer so-called ‘perfect’ societies. Keep in mind that VP is not an end point, but simply a structural readjustment that will continuously evolve in concert with human needs, since it is driven by them.
My reading of the VP paradigm is that we are equal in our humanity and our freedom, our ability to make the most of ourselves should we choose to do so. Any other try at making all people ‘equal’ destroys both freedom and individuality. This is something that i cannot possibly support, and yet i think that the VP will protect these values, rather than threaten them, as you feel it would.
There will always be people who work harder than others, do they not deserve more, or deserve first share of the resources? This goes to the heart of the social engineering question- in a society where everything is available, how is exceptionalism rewarded? Ultimately, i think that human beings, absent monetary rewards or incentives, will redefine their concepts of reward and fulfillment. Again it comes back to doing what most satifies your sense of individual self. A human who evolves consciously will no longer ask ‘what’s in this for me?’, but will instead ask ‘what will this make possible for others to achieve?’.

The Venus Project, or anything like it can never work without people shifting their values, and as i said in an earlier post, this is not something that can or should be forced on people. For to do so would betray the very foundations and principles upon which the VP seeks to act, that being, our desire to be better than we currently are.

I do in fact study philosophy (although I am only 21 years of age and have yet to even begin to acquire anything even close to knowledge), but just because I tend to look at things ideologically, does not mean that I do not see how they must be tampered down to be molded to the reality of human nature. And I don’t think anyone is trying to predict anything with certainty. It is rather imposing possible solutions to a problem that direly needs to be addressed. Again, the VP doesn’t claim that it will fix everything, and make everyone happy. It is just one of many ideas that propose a way to generate a society that is indeed based off equality, which in turn gives everyone the best shot at happiness and longevity. There is no way to predict how certain individuals will act, but if our entire society was structured in a way that promoted certain things over others, I truly believe that it would vastly improve the current situation. With billions of people struggling each day to find the bare necessities to survive, I think anyone who would claim that things could not be better would be nothing short of ignorant (not saying you are, just in general).

As for de-centralized power, I totally agree. A true democracy where all informed citizens could vote on issues with equal impact would be the world’s best form of government (look to my 11-16 post for more details on how this could be).

The VP advocates leadership by committee. If someone has an idea, they would enter their idea on their computer and send it to the VP central computer (super computer). the computer would interprete the data. If the computer determines the idea to be a valid project it will give you all the results of data and materials, resources needed to move foward. You have the option to bring in more people to help with the effort. This collaborative effort of teams will go on and produce their project, whatever it may be. The incentive here is people working together for one common goal to help make people’s lives better. In this society there can be countless teams working on projects that are deemed valid my the central computer. Valid meaning, something that can help or advance people’s lives. Money is no longer an obstacle. I know what you are saying who programs the computers? People do of course but under the guidlines of the VP. Computers have no bias, they can’t be bribed, they don’t care if you are good looking, they are programmed to supervise, maintain and distribute accordingly the Earth’s resources. This is one aspect of the Venus Project that I hope people would understand.

Yes, Jill, that is a great link. Thanks

Whoaaa! that’s an angry man.

I do think about Africa quite a little bit and it is unspeakably disturbing the way those people are forced to live.

As for why? Take a look at Zimbabwe. They suffer because their leader is a completely
corrupt idiot who refuses to give up power even though his people are in terrible shape.

Is that our fault? Should we do something? Should the impotent UN do something? What would you have us do? Look how great getting rid of Saddam Hussein turned out.

Dismantling our system won’t do anything to improve the lives of Zimbabweans or Africans in general. It will take the will of those people to defeat their corrupt leaders and build a better world for themselves.

It’s coming, but it’s going to take some more time.

“After-all, if resources can act as a form of currency, then who needs an intermediary in the form of money?”

You are talking about barter. It was used successfully for thousands of years, but it grew too cumbersome for a larger society.

Maybe if we have some kind of nuclear holocaust and the population dwindles to thousands not the billions who currently inhabit the planet, barter may come back along with a whole lot of other unsavory things. Otherwise, money is here to stay.

you are absolutely right corruption is the great evil of our sociey, who doesnt know this, what you have to understand is that money is just a piece of paper my friend, you cannot do anything with a piece of paper, but you can buy whatever you please with money right, so keeping profits high for what money or what money can allow corrupt people to have, regardless if you were to make the monetary system disappear corruption will somehow be illustrated in a different type of way, dont be naive and study history, have the monetary always existed no, but corruption has because it is part of human nature. Back in ancient civilization the powerful rich people were considered to be the landowners that controlled all the products that was produced, cattle etc. corruption was there too. This is how humans treat each other. So dont tell me cause of technology this is going to change, answer a couple of questions then, according to Jacque Fresco with the Venus Project it will end crime and corruption, so who is goin to build all of those machines that is he promising you? who is going to give him all of those materials, equipment, personnel to work on these projects, you? Let us believe someone is able to provide with all of these wonderful gifts so wouldnt that put that individual and jacque fresco in control and power over everything? o that’s right they are wonderful people that care for you and me and are willing to give us everything we need, dont you get it jacque fresco is just the same as those cooporations you complain so much about, he is a man with a project with a sole purpose the want for POWER screw money, the only reason people aim for money is because it gives them power, and you are rigt about the monetary system, but regarless that system or not human like jacque fresco will just find some other ways to gain that power he will be in control all of the machines that would provide for your happily living, o wait that’s right he is going to put you in charge right, please dont be naive and if you really believe then maybe you can move down with fresco and he could start by providing for you now!

They do mention it. Most if not all hate, jealousy, and anger is rooted in inequality. How could one be jealous of one’s equal?

“Absolutely. The American people bought it”. I’m going to disagree with that, the American people did not buy it because there is no such monolith called “the American people” there are only people in America. There were millions of people marching in the streets, the war was never that popular.”

Fair enough- I think the general mass supported the war through a false premise, but you are absolutely right- not all of Americans were in support of it, including myself. I wish more people would have investigated the truth of this war…

“this immediately shows your bias”. Yes, I never claimed I didn’t have a bias. Search for the post called “Open minds are closed”.”

Agreed, and as I said, I wasnt holding it against you. I have the same bias.

“Modern day capitalism is slavery”. No, fascism (which is what we have) is slavery. We don’t have a capitalist system.”

Agreed- hence the distinction of “modern day” before capitilism. Unfortunately, the fascism we experience today is one of many possible failures in the system of capitalism. This is not to say capitalism is this way by design, just that the methods utilized today in the American Empire show its potential weaknesses and potential evolution to fascism.

“what can you say in defense of the current system and its inherent flaws”. Straw man, I’m not defending the current system.”

Umm.. this makes me want to forget about having an intelligent debate on this thread. I apologize if I misinterpret “straw man,” but the only thing that comes to mind is the wizard of oz, and therefore “If I only had a brain.” Once again, forgive me if this is a misconception, but this alludes to my being stupid. I know you dont support the system- Ive looked at other articles on this page, and I agree with you on many of those articles. My argument is generalized for those who support the system we have, or state it better than the potential for VP. I feel I have been neutral and havent attacked anyone, and im trying to approach this as open to both sides as possible. Obviously I have bias as you do, so I may be close minded in some areas. A friendly exposure to these areas is enough. If I am in fact stupid, why not try to educate me? Thats what im here for…

Back to the subject hopefully?

“Straw man is a type of argument where you misrepresent your opponents position to something that is easier to argue against, you can look it up on wikipedia.”

I have never formally studied argument, so I didnt know that. This is why I told you to correct me if I was wrong . I dealt with attcks from others, so I was anticipating it from you.. Now that weve cleared that up, I was more or less trying to bring to mind the faults of the capitalist system. Neither one of these systems are perfect (as you agree), and this goes back to it being beyond our comprehension at this time.