An internet oasis of open discussion without personal attacks
Grendel wrote:I agree with your assessment but I think Transition Plan is a problem for all political movements, revolution just isn't a good answer, and as for money, a bartered economy seems naive and unworkable, however a capital based economy is unsustainable, their idea may be the least bad of the two. My problem with Zeitgeist is that it's conspiracy theory and has an unrealistic analyses of the way the world works. A major problem is when you are transitioning from something you really need an accurate analyses of what you're transitioning from.
Grecorivera5150 wrote:The transition is meant to be organic and ongoing. The spread of information and an appeal to reason is what will bring about a long term transformation. These films are meant to be a catalyst towards a particular point of view. I feel this is implied in the work as force is one of the major issues that this movement speaks out against. To nurture takes time and to nurture on such a grand scale involves a very large consensus. So the idea is to spread the information. Those who are capable and motivated will move the ball forward.
Grecorivera5150 wrote:Progress does not only have to come after a fight. There is a struggle going on and the struggle is to educate people. As many of the ideas of the Zeitgeist movement are outside the current status quo the spread of the information is the key. This is best done through the internet, social media and grass roots organizations. There are Zeitgeist groups that meet all over the world to try and see what affect they can have on their local communities.
This process can not and will not happen over night. There actions things beside what I mentioned already as far as professional approaches would go including: raising your children in the type of nurturing environment espoused in the film, embrace the idea of localism and sustainability through changing consumption habits and routines, try and live in such a way that you do not allow yourself to get overextended financially and beholden to financial institutions and you could join a regional group yourselves and become personally involved. There are also many communities that are trying to develop local currencies which i think could also be a viable policy implementation to move us away from such a monolithic and corrupt system of control. There is no grand sweeping action that can be implemented in such a movement when they do not want to use force.
The rejection of force is a key element in the point I am trying to make. Hopefully I have communicated this better. This movement is about trying to have progress in the human condition. Progress in the way we treat each other and progress in the way that we deal with the environment in the hopes of trying to reach a state of sustainable harmony. The future legitimacy of such a movement means that it can not engage in an attempt at a transition that will force anyone to become involved. When someone uses force to try and implement an initiative that was taken from the Zeitgeist movements ideas it automatically becomes something else other then the zeitgeist movement.
This is how seemingly peaceful institutions become fractured. Great examples of this are political parties and religions. First they can be a split into orthodoxy vs reformists and then these can break down into conservative, liberals, moderates ,extremists and fundamentalists. Next their is a complete split and new parties or sects evolve and then also stand the chance of becoming fractured. This is all usually due to an attempt at one group or individual trying to impose their will or system of beliefs on another because of differences values and interpretations of shared doctrines.
What the Zeitgeist movement is proposing in a complete paradigm shift. The likeliest way for these ideas to be realized and maintained will be pragmatically through incremental changes in the way people and communities think and act over time. The more chaos that exists in periods of social reformation the more violence there will be which translates to there being less trust after the smoke clears. As trust is an integral part of any system that is based on cooperation it follows setting an example through choices and sharing information is much more likely to lead to some positive change then the implementation of force or subversive indoctrination.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests