字幕表 動画を再生する
-
Understanding The Zeitgeist Movement Critics: Malicious Intent or Innocent Ignorance?
-
Hello, my name is Peter Joseph and this is a July 15th 2012 video essay.
-
I haven't done an essay in a while so I decided it would be about time.
-
This video is going to quickly address some persistent misinterpretations of the Movement
-
which originate from researchers and reporters
-
which, frankly, should know better.
-
Please understand that there are many people out there who oppose or object
-
to various issues brought up by the Movement.
-
But at least they do so in a way that actually has some basis
-
with respect to what the Movement is and does.
-
I have nothing but respect for those who oppose us with
-
general consideration and diligence in the process of their criticism.
-
As the old saying goes: "If we all agreed there would be no progress."
-
So this essay is not to denounce general critics of the Zeitgeist Movement
-
who have done basic, fundamental research of the Movement
-
and communicate their ideas and objections in a mature, respectful way.
-
That's amazing and great.
-
In fact, I want to bring on notable critics of the Movement
-
to The Zeitgeist Movement's global radio show
-
to speak with me and others directly about their objections.
-
Unfortunately a lot of people out there prefer to just criticize from afar.
-
And I'm sorry to say, if any researcher or reporter is not willing to interact
-
with those persons or groups they choose to criticize,
-
being open to change their disposition through new clarifying information,
-
their integrity is instantly void.
-
We live in a very different world today with the age of the Internet
-
and now everyone has the ability and freedom to present
-
their ideas and criticisms of the world.
-
However, as with all freedom comes increased responsibility.
-
And one-sided closed attacks are simply intellectually unjustifiable,
-
whether intended or not.
-
At any rate, if you would like to suggest somebody for our global radio show
-
please email media@thezeitgeistmovement.com
-
with the subject line 'TZM Objections'
-
and we will work to bring them on, so we can understand their criticisms better.
-
Okay, back on point.
-
The trigger for this essay was my recent discovery
-
of an apparently peer-review style article published in 2011
-
in the 'Journal of Contemporary Religion'
-
called 'The Emergence of Conspirituality'
-
by Charlotte Ward and David Voas.
-
I discovered this article by stumbling upon the current state
-
of The Zeitgeist Movement's Wikipedia page
-
which sadly undergoes constant edit-wars by some very persistent
-
and clearly anti-Zeitgeist Movement gatekeepers
-
that subtlely pollute and distort what The Zeitgeist Movement actually does.
-
You know as much as I appreciate Wikipedia's democratic platform
-
which is truly amazing in most cases,
-
when it comes to anything controversial
-
or seemingly subjective in interpretation,
-
you often end up with ongoing edit-wars,
-
and only the most persistent and aggressive will win.
-
In such a context, Wikipedia is not about truth and proper representation,
-
it is simply about aggression and persistence
-
and those with the most time, evidently, will win.
-
Anyway, while I never take Wikipedia seriously as a source on that basic level,
-
I am still very much amused by what surfaces in this sort of entertainment aspect
-
with respect to the ongoing debasing of The Zeitgeist Movement there
-
through deliberate misinterpretation and spin by its gatekeepers.
-
My favorite part is the current Criticism section,
-
not only because none of the criticisms actually have anything to do
-
with The Zeitgeist Movement's interests and intents,
-
but also because of how much it outweighs in focus
-
the other flimsy statements that appear to express
-
what The Zeitgeist Movement is,
-
actually providing no real information of relevance at all.
-
Just a hodge-podge of prima facie and trajections
-
that ignore mostly everything the Movement advocates,
-
harping instead on my personal unrelated artistic expressions,
-
the Zeitgeist film series,
-
specifically my first film,
-
which was made years before the Movement was even realized
-
and has no direct connection at all
-
with respect to the Movement's interests.
-
And for those familiar, it's nothing new,
-
we have endless 9/11 conspiracy relationships
-
from the first film highlighted,
-
which of course have nothing to do with anything we promote.
-
We have this very odd article by Michelle Goldberg
-
which suggests that the Movement is some type of anti-Semitic cult
-
along with some dubious claim about this German social network site
-
that banned evidently one of our groups because of anti-Semitism
-
which is completely absurd,
-
since there's no evidence that the group that was banned
-
had any official connection to our chapter network
-
and was not just some random page using our name
-
which has been prolific across the Internet.
-
And not to mention of course, The Zeitgeist Movement clearly
-
has no racial, religious or class bias,
-
and rather seeks human unification and support in general, not division.
-
But my real interest here is the noted article in the 'Journal of Contemporary Religion'
-
and the lapse - complete lapse - of academic integrity put forward by the authors,
-
which paints not only an incorrect picture of the Movement,
-
but an offensive and defaming one.
-
Let me ask you a question:
-
If you were a reporter wanting to learn about The Zeitgeist Movement objectively,
-
and you wanted to understand what it was, what it did,
-
what would YOU do? Would you go to Wikipedia?
-
Would you go to some random blog or YouTube video that comes up in a search engine?
-
Or would you go to the official site that actually made its points very clear
-
regarding what the organization does, its mission,
-
and review our official materials and lectures?
-
The Zeitgeist Movement's website has been up since 2009
-
with a very concise FAQ and enormous number of lectures by our lecture team.
-
It's very difficult to miss in fact, how obvious, what our mission is.
-
Sadly however, it appears the FAQ, the pdf guides, the lectures,
-
and the enormous amount of work put into this through radio shows,
-
and parallel websites, blogs and so forth,
-
our global event days, our town hall lectures, our media project,
-
the entire educational method and avocation,
-
apparently all of that is invalid
-
when it comes to the interests of some of those that wish to report on us.
-
Of course, to give credit where credit is due,
-
the New York Times and the Huffington Post reviews of Z-Day,
-
along with many live interviews and reports by Russia Today,
-
mostly got it right.
-
But the vast majority continue to embarrass themselves
-
with what appears to be simply lazy research,
-
or even worse, malicious intent.
-
In fact very quickly, an amusing article,
-
at least in gesture produced by the London Telegraph a few weeks ago,
-
without any noted evidence at all,
-
claims that an unfortunately disillusioned boy,
-
insensitively labeled as "Forest Boy" by the media,
-
was quote "inspired by the Zeitgeist Movement"
-
with the author going on to make some of the most egregious errors
-
I've ever seen in an article.
-
It said the boy "was inspired to travel to Germany
-
by the teachings of the Zeitgeist Movement
-
that aims to destroy market capitalism."
-
The Zeitgeist Movement has never published anything
-
about destroying anything, first of all.
-
Our disposition is simply that capitalism will destroy itself, in fact;
-
we are simply watching it go down and planning for the future
-
like any diligent group should.
-
As far as his traveling to Germany,
-
the author was forced to actually retract and remove
-
a claimed that I originated from Germany!
-
I, Peter Joseph apparently am a German citizen,
-
uh which ... of course I'm not,
-
amongst many amateur errors, that I guess that might add in well
-
with the argument that apparently I'm anti-Semitic
-
so I'm sure Michelle Goldberg appreciated that.
-
Nevertheless, it also refers to things like, it's a
-
"political movement that holds future generations will view Christianity as a fraud."
-
Actually, no, the Zeitgeist Movement respects all religions equally
-
as a course of human evolution
-
and has never published anything making such statements.
-
This is once again a deliberate misinterpretation
-
coming from my personal 2007 film
-
which had interests about comparative religion
-
and has nothing to do with the Movement itself.
-
If Michael Moore started a social movement,
-
does that movement mean it's going to have to be about say adolescent violence,
-
such as what was the context of his film in part for 'Bowling for Columbine?'
-
What about his movie Fahrenheit 9/11?
-
Does that mean his movement would have to be about 9/11 issues that was noted in the film?
-
No.
-
Even the premise that a whole non-profit social movement could be based upon
-
merely a film series is idiotic.
-
Anyway, moving on.
-
The article also refers to us as a protest movement,
-
which is really odd given that we've never protested anything and do not intend to,
-
for we don't believe in the efficacy of traditional protest.
-
Instead we work through peaceful educational projects
-
in the hope to bring about sound logic and reason regarding
-
new social possibilities.
-
So the public, once informed, can make up their own mind.
-
And if we transition we do,
-
if we don't, then we don't.
-
In the words of Buckminster Fuller,
-
a strong influence on the Zeitgeist Movement's intent,
-
"You never change things by fighting the existing reality.
-
To change something,
-
build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete."
-
Sadly, the Telegraph reporter is not alone
-
and this leads us to the noted article in the Journal of Contemporary Religion.
-
The context of the Zeitgeist Movement's inclusion in this article is presented
-
as related to a phenomenon perceived by the authors
-
called "conspiratuality"
-
which is defined as "a combination of New Age beliefs
-
and conspiracy culture" in effect.
-
Now, it isn't the scope of this essay to discuss the rather abstract linkage
-
the authors are trying to draw,
-
but I will say that the entire paper is based upon a series of self-defining
-
self-referring, extremely subjective, circumstantial presuppositions
-
that haphazardly and crudely categorize
-
a large number of counter-culture type groups in the world today.
-
Now, in some agreement regarding the subject of conspiracies as a theme
-
I will admit that I personally have lost a lot of patience with those
-
who rather than work to really consider the root causes scientifically of human behavior
-
oriented in a system like ours that rewards power consolidation and control,
-
they choose to just harp upon the symptom itself,
-
referencing the unseen "they" as it were.
-
The human blame game, no matter how exotic and creative,
-
simply bores me to death
-
as it actually isn't doing anything progressive.
-
And on that level,
-
I can share in the frustration of those who believe things
-
that really don't accomplish anything or could be erroneous
-
because they're not related directly to causality.
-
Yet, on the other hand,
-
to dismiss the very idea that human society historically
-
is and has been controlled by various power establishments-...
-
We can talk about traditional ones like kings and monarchs
-
to the age of feudalism; we could also extend that of course
-
to what the Occupy movement is fighting today with regard to financial power.
-
Those that seek and to preserve their self-interest over others
-
manipulating to their advantage dishonestly,
-
is not a profound, out-there, radical conspiracy nut-job notion, okay?
-
In a world today where 40% of the wealth is owned by 1% of the world's population,
-
anyone who thinks there is no structurally-based
-
self-interest oriented manipulation for upper-class advantage
-
is in an enormous level of denial
-
about the nature of our reality today.
-
And the use of the term "conspiracy theorist"
-
recently has served those in power quite well
-
by making all of those who realize such unfair social realities
-
simply appear like irrational lunatics.
-
So, as expected this article takes the establishment perspective overall,
-
painting the picture that any such realizations
-
are all irrational conspiracy theories
-
and is in turn painted, in their words,
-
as part of a "politico-spiritual philosophy"
-
when combined with the "New Age"
-
which they define as
-
"mystical individual transformation;
-
an awareness of new, non-material realities,
-
the imposition of personal vision into society
-
and belief in universally invisible but pervasive forms of energy."
-
Okay, all of that denoted let's step back and see how
-
they fit the Zeitgeist Movement into all of this.
-
On page 7 of the article extract,
-
a section entitled "The emergence of conspiratuality,"
-
they begin to discuss the Zeitgeist Movement by sourcing a singular statement,
-
very much out of context and in a very misleading manner,
-
from an old obviously cherry-picked introductory essay
-
called 'The Means is the End'
-
which can be found archived online.
-
They partially quote a paragraph which,
-
to one who is not read anything else in the essay
-
provides absolutely no info about what the Zeitgeist Movement is,
-
not to mention opening it up to large-scale semantic misinterpretations
-
obviously fitting their agenda.
-
The quote is as follows.
-
Open quote.
-
"The elite power systems are little affected in the long run