A couple of days ago I watched Zeitgeist: Addendum, which is far better than the first one and leads to more serious projects. Those projects are The Zeitgeist Movement and The Venus Project.
I won’t focus too much on the movie itself, it’s just a means to an end. There could be factual errors in it, but the overall message is what’s important. Also, there certainly is quite a bit of manipulation, including in directions that I don’t agree with, but that doesn’t make it less worthy of attention. This is an attempt to herd sheep the other way, which is a necessary (though far from sufficient) step towards creating any significant change in the world. Intelligent people will figure out the relevant information and pick sides according to it no matter what you do, but in order to sway the rest you need to be persuasive, and in that case you might as well make use of the methods employed by those who desire to preserve the current status quo, at least they are proven to work.
What needs to be said is that he has balls! And you need quite a big pair in order to do something like this… He also seems to have the brains to back them up with, but those brains are certainly not his alone and might even not be his at all. This partnership with The Venus Project gives some clues in that direction, though it might be just that, a partnership.
The Zeitgeist Movement’s site has just launched today and, from what I can see, the project (or “movement”) itself doesn’t have a clear plan of action. It is only an attempt to gather like-minded people and herd enough sheep in hopes of eventually reaching a critical mass and being able to actually do something concrete. This does seem to be the only realistic approach, if an attempt to completely change society can ever be called in any way realistic, and the determination is certainly commendable.
The problem is that… It can’t work. Not that you can’t change the world, history has proven that it can be changed, but that, even if it will become reality, such a society as the one advocated by this movement will not last. They correctly say that those who preserve the current state of affairs are only a symptom of the problem and the cause is the structure, the very foundation of our society, which creates such positions. They also correctly say that we can’t “fix” society as it is now, the only thing that would work would be a complete change. But then their reasoning fails because they don’t plan to put something in its place, or at least not something strong enough to preserve that new society, relying on education and their belief that informed people living in abundance would make the correct choices on their own.
History is showing us that many people will not make the correct choices, regardless of circumstances. Even if scarcity would be eliminated and all would live in relative abundance, some people would insist on defining their abundance as meaning having more than most others. Yes, completely changing the status quo so that would no longer be the norm and attempting to educate all people in this new spirit would put all the sheep on the “nice” side of the fence and would also make others who can be influenced by such things behave accordingly as long as they can see advantages for doing so, but there will always be people who won’t give in.
The very fact that such a movement exists is proof enough that education and society’s norms don’t work on all people. I don’t agree with their statement that a Gandhi baby is no different from a Hitler baby, that we all start with a clean slate. Some people do think for themselves and try to do what they consider to be right, and “right” might not be right for the world, but just right for themselves. (Plus that the issue of souls and past lives could be thrown into the mix and complicate matters further.) Since some people try to change the world now, it is only logical to say that some will try the same thing in the future. And having this prediction of the future, we must look to the past to determine the most likely direction of that change, and the past reveals a long list of actions determined by greed, violence, malice, competitiveness, desire to wield power over others or, often, plain stupidity. This leads me to conclude that any society which relies on the fact that all people are inherently intelligent and “good” is doomed to failure.
I also can’t be excited about a project that considers the idea of reducing population as “scary” and claims that, with the help of technological developments and intelligent resource management, the Earth can easily provide for a far larger number of people than currently exist. That’s simply false, because you also have to take the other species we share this planet with into account, plus that the one thing you can’t create more of is space. If more people are to live in far better conditions than they presently enjoy, you’ll need far more space, but the planet’s not getting any bigger!
Still, I think this is a great idea, because it is a solid challenge to the current world order and has the potential to gather noticeable support. The most important thing for now is agreeing that the current society needs to go and a new one needs to be created from scratch. And, if we are to dream that they could one day become reality, the goals themselves aren’t bad. If that new society will have care for the environment, sustainability, fairness and freedom among its fundamental principles, it will be much better than this one. And if it will also encourage creativity and expression, it will have the ability to evolve into an even better one, allowing the reformists of the future to take care of the loopholes and inconsistencies, and also ensure that adequate safeguards will be set in place in order to avoid a return to worse habits.
The Venus Project appears to be a rather carefully thought-out concept of the future. However, it should only be taken as a starting point, because it misses some key issues. For one, it (obviously) shares the flaws of The Zeitgeist Movement, but it’s also scary in a way.
What makes it scary is mainly the total disregard for the environment. Yes, you read that right. Despite the claims and the pretty pictures, it does not have an environmentalist foundation. It only cares for the environment in the sense that it should be exploited in such a way as to be able to continue offering benefits to humans. That does require sustainability and clean technology, but it does not require actual conservation or animal rights, which means that they are not part of the plan. It also advocates a certain degree of uniformity and the development of areas I wouldn’t be comfortable living in. That makes it a project I can’t support in its current form, but it is a decent starting point for other plans.
The problem with it is that, unlike The Zeitgeist Movement, which focuses mainly on social changes, if The Venus Project would be applied on a large scale we would not be able to go back to a previous state. (Of course, these two projects are connected and one seems to imply the other, but I’m trying to separate them according to which area each of them focuses on the most.) You can change the way things are done as needed, but once you change a part of nature there’s no going back. And once you change the entire infrastructure it is not feasible to go back. That makes this project as dangerous as it is interesting and useful.
It should be analyzed carefully and with an open mind, because it does offer a lot of good ideas, but this should be done while it’s still in the planning phase. Once this would be implemented in the current form, even if only locally, the damage would already have been done. Turning something like this into reality makes me think of primitive humans trying to bring fire into their caves for the first time during winter. We desperately need to do it, but we need to do it just right. One mistake and the damage could be tremendous.
This would be a brief overview of my thoughts regarding these two projects. Mainly the negative thoughts, of course, as we should eliminate the flaws before we think of improvements and there is not much to say about the things that are good just the way they are. I plan to write a post containing some of the changes and improvements I’d make, and the way to implement them, but that will take some time. Not to mention that I’ll need to convince myself to do it first…