Placeholder Image

字幕表 動画を再生する

  • Eerie Investigations meet Peter Joseph

  • Director of Zeitgeist and Zeitgeist Addendum

  • Zeitgeist, meaning spirit or mood of the time,

  • is the film of the time.

  • Produced as a personal creative project,

  • it was made available on the Internet

  • and quickly became a global phenomenon.

  • Its comprehensive coverage of the facts behind Religion,

  • 9/11 and the finance system

  • caused such an explosion in popularity

  • that Google's video counters reached their limits at 15 million views.

  • In October 2008, the second film "Zeitgeist: Addendum" was released.

  • Covering the banking system, its negative effects on humanity

  • and designs for an alternative, new and improved future.

  • Peter Joseph, Director of "Zeitgeist" and "Zeitgeist: Addendum"

  • talks with us about his reasons and inspirations

  • for creating both films, and his hopes for the future of Humankind.

  • Hi Peter, thank you so much for finding the time to talk to us today.

  • I know you've had a really busy schedule while you've been in England.

  • And, obviously we're here to talk about "Zeitgeist" - Of course.

  • - "Zeitgeist: Addendum" - Thank you for having me.

  • It's fantastic, we're so pleased about that.

  • First, before we kind of jump into "Zeitgeist"

  • If you could just tell me

  • a little bit about yourself, what you do, your background,

  • and why you started this project?

  • Well, as a commercial producer in New York,

  • it was very unfulfilling for the most part.

  • You walk the line, you have your job as anyone does,

  • and ultimately, I've always had other aspirations creatively

  • so I was engaged in other projects such as film making projects,

  • off-Broadway projects and multimedia projects.

  • So I had a pattern of doing this independently, on my own, in New York

  • even though it was never really for money or anything like that.

  • And as time went on I started to realize that there's a lot of

  • really terrible, sinister issues going on in the world

  • and I decided that it would be to my advantage

  • and to the advantage of society and actually to my own satisfaction,

  • to do something that would have not just

  • an artistic element for the sake of art, but something

  • that would actually be beneficial to the system,

  • because art without conscience, in a lot of ways

  • is kind of meaningless, I've come to find.

  • I think as time moves forward, you look back at what contributions

  • of art have really endured, they actually have a great presence

  • to them as far as how they relate to the human condition.

  • You go back to J.S. Bach and the Church

  • and just all of these elements that come forward with art

  • that has a relevance to it outside of just for the sake of art.

  • So a painting not for the sake of painting, but a painting for the sake of

  • actually communicating something about humanity

  • and the social conditions of the time perhaps.

  • So, "Zeitgeist" was an attempt to combine my artistic interests

  • with some social cause or social interest.

  • And I think what triggered it was 9/11

  • because of how catastrophic the event was, and then as time went on,

  • information began to come out,

  • about how ridiculous the government's account of the story was,

  • and then you began to see who actually gained from this,

  • as time went on, with the wars and the corporations.

  • So, my initial trigger for "Zeitgeist" the original movie was 9/11,

  • so to speak. And then as I was approaching this

  • to create an artistic work representing it

  • which by the way the original "Zeitgeist" was shown

  • as a multimedia work in lower Manhattan initially

  • with no intent to be an actual release, at all.

  • It was shown for six nights, for free, to an activist group

  • who came in, and then it was thrown up online afterwards

  • and then it just happened to erupt with interest. - Exploded.

  • Which, by the way, put me in a very precarious position,

  • because I didn't own the rights to a certain amount of it.

  • It was all friends I had made in the movement and things like this

  • so I had to retroactively go through this big mess.

  • As far as the film itself, religion was always

  • very interesting to me, ever since I was a child.

  • I was never raised in a really rigid religious environment,

  • but I was around it to a certain degree. My family's families

  • were very Catholic, my parents were not particularly religious.

  • - Yes, I was raised as catholic also. - Right. - And I went

  • to a Catholic school for a little while so I got to experience this,

  • and as a child, there was always something strange to me.

  • In one class I'd be in science, and then in one class

  • I'd go to this little church situation and, even at a young age,

  • there was a strange dichotomy to me that didn't make any sense.

  • And not to say that all religions don't have a value.

  • They actually all very much do, historically. And a lot of people

  • who see the film get the wrong impression about

  • what I'm trying to say about religion.

  • In the first film, I deal with the history of religion

  • that's sort of a history that no one really talks about

  • because it's not the established representation. - Pattern. - Right

  • I must admit that when I first watched that myself,

  • I was absolutely flabbergasted when you

  • show how the Christ religion and how many others came in

  • under very similar situations and that absolutely knocked my socks off

  • because I never knew anything like that.

  • - Yes, the dying and resurrecting god man. - That's right!

  • - Has been going on for millenia, for ages

  • and it's a symbolic rebirth, as early pagan ideology,

  • it's where you're born again, all these... - because it goes right to

  • the Druidism and the Solar Cross, Myth of the sun.

  • - It's age old, exactly.

  • And it has multiple symbolisms, apart from the Sun as being its core.

  • Astrotheology is the terminology used to describe this stellar

  • and solar element that has basically been transmuted

  • and transformed into the historical religions

  • that we think these attributes are actual history, when if you look

  • far enough back, you see that it's basically pure allegory.

  • And even if there were certain characters that emerged historically

  • say in Christianity, there probably was somebody

  • that fulfilled some role that this Christ character assumed.

  • But by the time the Bible came to fruition,

  • the Christ character was transformed into a totally mythological figure.

  • So there really isn't a historical element, there is no documentation of

  • a historical Christ. In that, it's very challenged, of course...

  • - So where do we stand with the Bible,

  • because, there are so many books in there talking about the Christ

  • so, I guess you must have miffed off a lot of Christians

  • when you put this out there. - And they misinterpret, I believe,

  • because even if he didn't exist it doesn't matter,

  • it's the message - It is the message, yes!

  • Religion has a propensity toward materialism, they don't call it

  • materialism, but they hold onto something

  • and they really can't break away from it

  • and that's the definition of materialism in my mind.

  • So to think that, just because this character didn't exist

  • this demeans the whole thing, is not necessarily the case,

  • if you want to drive for pure superstition, then yes

  • it is the case, which of course I don't advocate.

  • I think philosophy is much more important than

  • philosophy, superstition is a derogatory sort of term.

  • But when it comes to these notions of

  • the man dying for your sins. I think these are misconstrued.

  • I think there's no real relevance to it. And it's based on this sort of

  • control mechanism that you are guilty the moment you are born,

  • and he died for your sins - Original sin

  • - Yes. It's distorted on one side and then there's also kernels of truth

  • that speak to the human condition like "love thy neighbor".

  • - So everything gets mixed up together, doesn't it?

  • - It does, and, to speak a little more about that,

  • the Christ character is very much composite, because,

  • there is a lot of dichotomy in his rhetoric.

  • In one passage he says : "I don't bring peace, I bring a sword",

  • "I want to have your neighbor against neighbor" and then

  • in another passage it's "Love thy neighbor and love your enemies".

  • - So it's a bit of a mixed message, isn't it really?

  • - Well, because it's a composite text, and that makes sense

  • you find these dichotomies, these ying and yangs

  • happening through lots of different God men that have existed,

  • so that's why it's even more proof that it's-

  • - On the research that you've done on all these different

  • characters in history who come in as religious leaders, icons.

  • Which ones would you say, actually really, do you believe, did exist?

  • - As far as the major religions? - Any religion

  • - I think it's obvious that the later religions, there's some of them.

  • Muhammad existed, that's well documented by historians.

  • But the farther you go back, the more the characters

  • become more elusive in their definition.

  • Buddha, I'd question if Buddha existed.

  • His symbology is extremely solar, just like Krishna.

  • And these, of course, are thousands of years before Christ.

  • It's just, almost, I don't really focus on it frankly,

  • I don't really think if they exist or not it matters, but if you go back

  • far enough there really is no historical documentation, secular.

  • So, if you can't find that, then all you're looking at

  • is the faith based texts,

  • which are inherently biased because of what they actually are.

  • So, I really couldn't tell you. I think, obviously,

  • that Allah didn't exist per se.

  • It's the god that was a redefined element

  • from the old testament and the new testament.

  • And then, Muhammad, I guess,

  • definitely did exist because it was

  • not that far along, it was 800, 900 years after Christ and there are,

  • actual historical documentations. I think he's been interpolated,

  • just as all... all of them have,

  • they take the prior faiths, and they just build upon it.

  • They are emerging culminations, but the characters are in the stories.

  • You tend to find this throughout all religious texts,

  • even I think, to modern religions,

  • and you find all sorts of strange things, like Scientology,

  • things like this, that continue these types of patterns.

  • So, I think the sadness to me is that most religions are arrogant,

  • and they don't realize that they are interconnected.

  • And I think if they realized it, there wouldn't be so much dispute.

  • I mean, the problem with religious texts in general

  • is that they are semantically interpreted.

  • Christianity alone has about 34,000 different subgroups,

  • and they all are slightly at odds with each other.

  • The Seventh Day Adventists, you know. They all have these tiny

  • little variations of interpretation. I believe that's very dichotomous

  • and, in the end, my major argument

  • towards religion is that it's completely divisive of humanity.

  • So, It's not progressive. It has crumbs of truth,

  • but I think it's time most move beyond these dogmas,

  • and these faiths that really tend to separate humanity because

  • nothing is going to come positive from that type of awareness

  • - Well, I was talking to someone the other day about this

  • we all want to work together as one humanity, but,

  • it's like, there's groups, and then there's groups within groups.

  • As I was saying to someone the other day, "You're pink and I'm blue",

  • we're still trying to aim for the same things, but it just dissects people

  • all the time. And in this culture where the world is becoming

  • a smaller place, it's so sad that we're not coming together

  • and we seem to be spreading further apart.

  • - Somewhat - Yeah, and it's really sad that, you know,

  • everybody is in their own camp and they don't want to come together

  • - Right - Because there's one slight difference

  • - Sure, everyone sees the differences between each other,

  • they tend not to see the similarities.

  • In the new film, I have a quote by Carl Sagan which is very nice,

  • which is like :"If an extraterrestrial visitor came to the planet,

  • they would probably recognize all the similarities

  • between the species, and tend to see differences as trivial"

  • because we all function in the same environment,

  • we all have the same needs fundamentally.

  • So I think it's a flaw of consciousness that's happened.

  • And I would say, to give it a rhetorical kind of notion,

  • we're barely out of the jungle on this planet as far as consciousness.

  • - Exactly! - So you know, I think, through time, and that's why

  • I've made the films that I do, I talk about the topics that I do,

  • people will realize that this infighting, and I think it slightly comes from

  • the restrictions of our language, because in order for me to

  • describe something to you, I have to separate things

  • into words : this is a table, this is a glass.

  • So division is inherent in our cognitive awareness,

  • but we haven't reached a spiritual awareness enough to know that

  • even though this is a glass, it's still made of the same thing as this table

  • and the fact that it's separate from this table is actually quite suspect.

  • It just looks that way because of our five sense reality.

  • Molecularly, when you get into quantum mechanics

  • and high levels of science, it's more of like a sea of molecules

  • that sort of intermerge, and there's different things

  • that happen over time, time spans that are so vast

  • that we can't really recognize, so we don't see them.

  • Like, if I have my hand on here long enough, it's going to make

  • an imprint on this table, through the chemicals

  • that will emerge... - That's right - ...and come together.

  • So there's no separation, it's an illusion

  • that there's any type of separation. - Just as well, on that subject,

  • I know it's slightly going off the beaten track.

  • But, talking about things making an imprint :

  • sound and vision, ghosts,

  • I know I'm throwing it into the pot there, but,

  • things are being recorded, like we're recording this now.

  • That's something that could come in where things are stuck in time,

  • and then something triggers it off. What do you think about that?

  • I've never really given much thought to that specifically, but I think

  • there's a lot of possibilities out there that we don't have the ability

  • to recognize. The problem with the human mind typically is that we only

  • see what we have been conditioned to see.

  • And I mean that very literally.

  • There's been tests done, psychological tests

  • where you can have a picture and one side of it will be,

  • inside the picture will be multiple symbologies. And it'll gauge

  • someone's mentality, someone's particular state of mind at that point.

  • So, say someone's angry and they show this picture, the person

  • will immediately recognize the negative attribute in the picture.

  • If someone is happy, they find the positive attribute in the picture.

  • So I think we project, like crazy,

  • so things that are outside of our general consciousness,

  • I think the reason that they're not recognized by many

  • is because they don't have the vocabulary to recognize it.

  • So, phenomenon that would be considered,

  • supernatural, to whatever that might mean.

  • Well, I would say that generally speaking that everything is natural,

  • there is no such thing as supernatural. It's only supernatural

  • to the extent that... - We don't understand it, yes.

  • So, things like a ghost, whatever that is, which we say it's something

  • like that, we have a cognitive notion of what it could be.

  • But these figments that could occur

  • could actually be many, many different things.

  • And most that would experience that are too closed

  • to recognize that in general. - Exactly,Well I always liken it to,

  • my expression has always been : "it's a higher science

  • that we haven't quite discovered how it works yet.

  • You know, when we say, like, you say, supernatural phenomena,

  • and then somewhere, further on down the line it's explained,

  • and then people go, "Oh, that's how it works" - Yeah, just like back

  • in the old days they thought ghosts would possess you, and give you

  • illnesses. - Yeah, we've moved on a bit since then, I hope.

  • - Well yeah. And we'll continue to move on and

  • discover all sorts of nuances of unexplained things that will

  • eventually be explained by understandings and

  • technological understandings that we can recognize. I think

  • it's an obvious pattern. And that's the unique thing about knowledge.

  • There's no such thing as tangible knowledge or there's no such thing

  • as a smart person. It's just a matter of time before everything we know

  • is basically transformed or eradicated and built upon. - It's like a child.

  • A child being in nursery school as opposed to a professor

  • being in a university, it's just that professor has had

  • the time to learn everything that he's learned.

  • So it doesn't mean to say that child, because he's ignorant of

  • knowledge, will not reach that status at one point in its life.

  • - Right - And also, we were talking about frequencies,

  • and what you just said before was, "We see what we want to see".

  • - Very often, yes - Because a lot of the time, we block things out,

  • because, possibly, it's just too much for our brains to want to take in

  • - Possibly - we just don't want the knowledge - Right

  • And it just reminds me of a story, I don't know if you've heard this

  • and I think it might have been Paul McKenna, I'm not sure

  • a hypnotist over here I don't know if you've heard of him.

  • And he was on stage, and there was a chap where

  • he had this watch on, and there was the child, who was in front,

  • of like the hypnotist and saying, "What's, what's on the watch?"

  • But he couldn't see because the child was there, but he could see

  • right through the child to see what the inscription

  • on the watch was, so how could he do that? - That's fascinating

  • - So he was, the hypnotist made him block out

  • what was in front of him, the child,

  • which was blocking the view to the watch, and he could see

  • right through it, he could give the inscription and everything

  • and I was just absolutely amazed by that. So it just goes to show

  • that you can tune and see, going on to the molecular level. - Sure.

  • - So you can see through the fog as they might say. - Right

  • - And just as we're on that subject of seeing

  • the real picture, because this is what we're talking about to do

  • with "Zeitgeist", is seeing the real picture,

  • I feel like, and I don't know if you feel like this,

  • that sometimes we are just being tuned in on a frequency

  • just so all we say is what certain bodies want us to say.

  • - Well, sure, that I think you could say that the mass media does that

  • on a daily basis, so they've created this illusion of terrorism.

  • - Exactly - Which is statistically irrelevant.

  • As far as, the odds of any of us dying

  • in a terrorist act are virtually zero.

  • But yet, you turn on a television and that seems to be

  • a very common topic continuously.

  • And then they change the language so now the war in, say, Iraq,

  • is no longer a war against insurgents; it's a war against terrorism.

  • So then you have this nonsense that's perpetually built upon,

  • and they did the same thing, you know, with communism,

  • they did the same. They just need these enemies for that example.

  • But, the media tells us what to think, and it creates a state of mind.

  • We tend to absorb that and create an identity with it

  • and then we end up projecting it.

  • So, that's the thing about, we're so influenced

  • that we have to be very careful in how we behave, in multiple levels.

  • That's one of the things about consciousness that

  • many don't really realize. Coming to the new film,

  • one of the things that I talk about is the free market system,

  • or what I call more generally, the monetaryism,

  • as a general distinction, which is more of an invented word.

  • Where all societies, it doesn't matter what they are, if they're

  • communists, socialists, fascists or even free market capitalists;

  • They all have the same type of competitive structure inherently,

  • because it still exists, we all exist within scarcity.

  • So there's a taking mechanism that comes naturally in the environment.

  • I don't say naturally because that's the way we are.

  • There's this debate of course between human nature and human behavior,

  • and nature versus nurture, these attributes.

  • I tend to find in my understanding,

  • this brings me back to this point on the awareness,

  • is that it's mainly,

  • I'd say 90 percent behaviorism is what conducts what we do.

  • In other words our environment dictates what we, how we communicate,

  • obviously, I could be born in the middle east,

  • and I could be born to a Muslim family

  • and odds are I would be speaking Arabic, and be Muslim.

  • So, for example religion,

  • in regards to the same point we were discussing

  • as far as this brainwashing, so to speak, is the way I would put it,

  • a sort of conditioning which we touched upon.

  • It's completely arbitrary to, as far as the established religions.

  • If you're born in this area, you're most likely gonna be in that religion.

  • Most people don't think that way, which I find fascinating.

  • But anyway, that's a little bit of a side track from what I meant to say

  • as far as the free market, capitalism and everything else.

  • We live in an environment that rewards competitive and

  • chiseling mentalities. Parasitic mentalities, where all of our

  • established institutions, in order to survive they have to get money,

  • in order to get money they have to basically fight for it

  • one way or another. They don't call it fighting, they call it

  • negotiation or they call it this and that - Clever words -

  • Yes, but what it really is,

  • the whole species is divided in this "us against them" type of element

  • on a daily basis, just because, in order to survive

  • you have to do certain things for your own self interest.

  • You have to take, as opposed to give. And the difference I think is

  • that our environment now, has conditioned us into this

  • overwhelmingly selfish mentality that really has reached the point

  • where things like the corruption of the Iraq war, and say a cat burglar

  • there's no difference whatsoever. I broke my thought there for a second,

  • There's no difference between a cat burglar, needing to survive

  • because they come from scarcity, or more specifically saying,

  • where I come from, south central Los Angeles,

  • there's no jobs, everyone sells drugs.

  • They're addicted to drugs because they're upset,

  • because they're in this horrid environment of poverty.

  • So they do what they have to do to survive. There's no difference

  • between that type of criminal behavior and, say, the high corporate elite

  • that chooses to invade a country to take its resources, take it over,

  • and create all the elements that it wants

  • for its own personal gain. It's the same mechanism.

  • And I think that's something that hasn't been realized.

  • And it's the environment that's to blame for all of this.

  • Granted survival is inherent, it's a genetic base of that we want to live.

  • But how we conduct our living is based on what we've been taught

  • as far as what the necessity is. So back to my original point, is that

  • everything is taken in the system, one way or another, or manipulated.

  • You manipulate your environment to get what you need one way or another.

  • If I want a job, I have to go in and convince the boss that I need that job.

  • If the boss wants to give me a low wage, he has to convince me

  • that for some reason, they have to give me this wage. I have to convince,

  • if I go and have to compete with someone else that needs the job.

  • You could twist this around into all sorts of, you know, seemingly

  • endless spirals of, like, that's just the way it is, and it's OK

  • it's not really corrupt. I get these arguments all the time.

  • - But it changes a person, doesn't it? Because, like you say

  • you have to become vicious.

  • - To a certain degree - To get that job, yes you do.

  • And people say, well you don't have to get that job there

  • but actually everyone has to work. One way or another

  • this is one of those things in the system that everyone talks about

  • and the mechanism is this manipulative, chiseling,

  • parasitic, taking type of mentality.

  • And my original point, which I've jumped around a lot, is that

  • I think that the conscious awakening has to occur

  • when people realize that it's giving and not taking that is the key.

  • So in a new society, which is what I advocate in the new film,

  • the shift would have to be that people realize that their integrity

  • is only as good as the integrity of everything else around them.

  • For example, if I'm walking down the street and I see a homeless person

  • I know that through time, there might be

  • a propensity for that homeless person to commit crime.

  • Because they have to survive, they might have to rob people,

  • they might have to do what they might have to do; and,

  • when pushed in a corner, like an animal, in fear,

  • they're going to do what they have to do to survive. - Exactly,

  • fight or flight? - Well sure, yes. So, as long as there's

  • a homeless person, or a person that's deprived,

  • and abused perhaps, I'm not safe.

  • And this is something no-one really thinks about

  • no one's safe in this system in general

  • because it divides everything up; there's always

  • the "have's" and the "have not's" due to this system

  • because there's always edges in the system,

  • there's manipulative edges that certain groups can gain, it's inherent.

  • It's inherently corrupt, basically, is the way I would describe it.

  • So, in order to combat that, in order to combat say,

  • someone that is going to rob you and hurt you, which is simultaneous

  • to combat the corruption of a ruling elite, in my opinion.

  • You have to start altering the environment and altering

  • the conscience of the people, and to do that,

  • people have to realize that they have to start contributing

  • to the world at large in more of a communal sense.

  • It can't be all a selfish mechanism, it can't be survival of the fittest,

  • it can't be the old Adam Smith free market ideology of :

  • "You preserve yourself, and everyone does things for themselves

  • and therefore society will work out as a whole by some invisible hand"

  • which is what he used to claim. I'm not putting down Adam Smith,

  • he did say a lot of good things, I'm just using that as an example.

  • He's one of the fathers of this free market system.

  • And it's also related to all other forms, not just the free market.

  • People think I'm just attacking Capitalism and things like that.

  • I've been working on this concept called "The Zeitgeist Movement"

  • which is an attempt at a grassroots conscience awakening

  • environmental shift for literally the species

  • as ambitious as that might sound.

  • You tend to find most movements are politically oriented,

  • they're regional, they're specific to certain things.

  • I've yet to see something that really would attempt to unite humanity,

  • especially with an actual tangible train of thought,

  • not just, you know, hyperbole of idealism.

  • So, after the first film came out, everyone asked me

  • what do we do about these issues, what do we do about these problems

  • and I thought about it, of course, myself.

  • The first film doesn't give much of an answer to anything like that,

  • except at the very end when I talk about consciousness in general,

  • the need for people to realize how they are interconnected.

  • Very quickly I denote that through a few different personalities

  • at the very end, which I actually pick up with in the new film.

  • What I found, through my research, as I was approaching the new film

  • I discovered was a man named Jacque Fresco

  • and a project called "The Venus Project".

  • Jacque Fresco is about 92 years old now,

  • he's been working his entire life thinking about social design

  • thinking about something you typically never hear about.

  • Where you actually design society to benefit society

  • as opposed to this kind of environment we are in now,

  • where everything is just kind of a free for all, with different levels

  • of differential advantage, everyone wants to sell something.

  • Nothing really gets done in our current society unless money

  • can be made from it. There are all sorts of problems such as the fact

  • that we think we live in a free society. Well you may be free enough to

  • step out your door and walk down the street and go buy things.

  • But you're only as free as your purchasing power will allow you to be.

  • - Exactly - So really, there's no such thing in a monetary system

  • as a free country, it doesn't exist.

  • So, you're a slave to a corporate structure, basically, very simply put.

  • Essentially Jacque Fresco,

  • presented new ideas to me I had never thought about,

  • and it took a long time for me to absorb, like I think

  • a lot of people, when they first hear about these ideas,

  • it takes a very long time for them to realize, because they've been

  • so indoctrinated into this, sort of,

  • freedom oriented capitalist connotation,

  • or free market connotation where they think that,

  • they associate freedom with the fact that they go and

  • they can buy whatever they want. They can buy from,

  • they can choose from 75 types of cereal in a grocery store

  • yet there is only two political parties in their country. - Exactly

  • - There's a massive disconnect - That's crazy isn't it? -

  • And they have no idea that democracy is a complete illusion

  • because in a true democracy, well first of all,

  • whatever a true democracy may be is actually to leave to question.

  • But in our system, money rules everything.

  • And all you have to do is look at any campaign across the world,

  • especially in the western world, to see that money and the

  • financial support from financial backers, the financial industry itself,

  • such as in America, we have Barack Obama now,

  • who's heavily backed by Wall Street.

  • He completely destroyed McCain and his financial backing.

  • His funding is heavily financial and corporate.

  • They put people in power that support the industry at large.

  • The United States, for example, is just a large corporation.

  • - Of course it is - And just like the UK or anything else

  • And if people can't see that, then they really need to open their eyes

  • Absolutely, and that's one of the things that people

  • don't really think about much, is the real problem of money itself,

  • and this is what Jacque Fresco thought about.

  • And in his final conclusions, that I found, it made perfect sense to me.

  • It's that you can't have balance or equality or a world without poverty

  • or a world without war, or any of these, sort of, utopian,

  • Christian ideals that people think about in a very traditional sense.

  • Like, why can't we have people living in a balanced,

  • classless, non hierarchical, non elitist type of environment.

  • Why is it that the elite always come to fruition? And to really

  • figure it out, if you didn't recognize that the biggest tool,

  • the biggest catalyst of this is the monetary system

  • because it perpetuates stratification. It perpetuates greed,

  • it perpetuates poverty, it perpetuates scarcity.

  • Very quickly, one of the many things

  • I learned about "The Venus Project" very quickly is

  • that the monetary system creates scarcity because

  • scarcity is rewarded. So you can never have a world of abundance,

  • you can never have a world where everyone is fed. Because, in such

  • an environment, no-one can make money off of it.

  • Inherently. So scarcity and deprivation is built into the system.

  • Corruption, is built into the system. So, what he began to think about

  • and what I'm advocating in the new film, which I very much support,

  • and I have my own trains of thought too, it's not just

  • "The Venus Project" and in fact it isn't just Jacque Fresco,

  • it's his underlying ideology that you have to start

  • designing society to benefit humanity as a whole.

  • And scarily enough to many people, in this fearful,

  • new world order kind of environment of people who think this way

  • you need a certain degree of technological world unification

  • in order to do so. And when I say this, a lot of people say,

  • "woah, that's like one world government".

  • - Yes, that's been on a lot of people's lips actually. - Yes it has.

  • - They've very scared about how we could go down that path. - Sure.

  • But there is an inherent fallacy to these notions,

  • you need world unification, basically because the highest optimization

  • of utilizing the planet would be an organization worldwide.

  • That's why I say I say technological and intellectual unification.

  • It's not that you could break down all the borders, and you'd have

  • no countries, that's not at all. First of all countries are inherently

  • primitive. The monetary system and need for survival

  • is what creates countries, essentially.

  • Countries would exist in the future, hopefully as a form of organization.

  • It wouldn't be nationalism. - I was gonna say that, who's

  • gonna run the show? Who's gonna be in charge?

  • - We get rid of money, which they are trying to do anyway.

  • - Well, sort of. - They're trying to move the paper stuff out,

  • where does it go from that? - They want to have a digital currency

  • - That does affect a lot of economies if paper goes. - Well, yes.

  • They can't control, the mechanism of paper

  • is traceable, and they used to have the pound,

  • used to be supported by gold, and same with the dollar

  • and now that's been gone, they just have these little things

  • they say it's fiat, basically. In the States they do. Eventually

  • they're going to eradicate the currency, and you'll get to the point where

  • there's no way to trace anything, to look at the numbers or the math.

  • Like, I can look at the math, more or less, at the federal reserve

  • and see how corrupt in the pyramid scheme that it is. You can look at

  • the inflation, you can look at the depreciation of the dollar.

  • You can look at all the attributes more or less still, once they

  • financially get to the point where they have the technology to do it,

  • they'll make it a complete illusion. Which is what it is anyway.

  • Money isn't real. The only thing that is real are resources

  • and that's what Jacque Fresco recognized. So you have to move past

  • this, and realize that resources are really what's important

  • and until we utilize the resources, and utilize our

  • intellectual creativity, which is what creates technology,

  • which is really what everything is in regard to

  • what helps us on a very utility based level.

  • Everything is technology, from this chair to this...

  • - Why don't we just talk about the technology

  • if I can just jump in there - Sure - I'm fascinated about

  • how do we get rid of the oil and the pollution.

  • And if you could just talk about solar energy

  • and geothermal? - Geothermal energy - That's the one.

  • - There are so many different forms of energy out there, we are

  • restricted to oil or anything only because of the corporate structure.

  • So there is no sustainability in this type of system because

  • there is a need for self preservation, which inherently

  • is corrupt. Because systems that have, you know they...

  • Evolution continues in an emergent cycle, and we discover

  • certain things, and we are always going to discover something better.

  • But what happens in the monetary system is, because money is made off

  • of one institution, they don't want to change. And until they can get

  • the leverage to maneuver themselves... - Exactly, into something else.

  • - Like they want to bring in hydrogen into America.

  • Why? because they can use the same infrastructure as gasoline,

  • as opposed to say, battery technology, which at this day and age

  • could be unbelievable if they actually maximized the potential of it.

  • Given how small microchips and everything is now, there's no reason

  • that you couldn't have a battery in a car that could run for,

  • eventually, a thousand miles, on one charge. It's just insane

  • to think that we can't do that, because we certainly can.

  • So, it's parasitic, it's paralyzing, is what the system is.

  • We're paralyzed. - And parasitic - Well, parasitic inherently,

  • but as far as the actual progress, we're paralyzed.

  • So technological progress is restricted because of

  • the monetary system and the need for self-preservation.

  • - But how do we make this jump from? - Well, you have to have a shift.

  • - This "Venus Project", the utopia? - That's the most difficult question,

  • - Exactly, how will we do it? - It'll take a shift in consciousness

  • People will have to realize what's important. Unfortunately, we have

  • so many dichotomous religions and world views...

  • I'm not ignorant and naive to the difficulty of it,

  • but this is the path. This is what has to happen.

  • You have to have people realize how they are interconnected

  • symbiotically, and then simultaneously realize that everything

  • is emergent and changing. And those are two things

  • that people don't recognize. The arrogance of religion is such

  • where, people believe they are separate, that they are special.

  • They think that they're different for some reason than a bug

  • or something; the reality is that there is no difference whatsoever.

  • But, this is what they've been taught, this is our primitiveness

  • that perpetuates, and keeps us divided and separated from nature.

  • Because once you step back and realize how we're connected to nature

  • Well, first of all we're connected to nature with to the effect that,

  • everything we do has a cause and effect. And with each other,

  • and everything else, and with the environment. Corporate pollution

  • is unbelievable, they don't care about the environment.

  • No one is realizing this. So, when you realize that,

  • you realize that in order to live in harmony with nature,

  • you have to actually listen to nature, understand its processes,

  • its natural laws, in a line, there's no reason we should do anything

  • that's not sustainable. 75% of most production is waste.

  • So to make anything, there is so much waste involved.

  • Not to mention, for example, a computer is made out of materials

  • that are only durable to the extent that the market system

  • will allow for them to maintain market share.

  • So the highest form of resources aren't utilized, to make things

  • really long and efficient because, inherently,

  • they have to keep market share so things get more and more cheap.

  • - Everything's meant today to break down. - Planned obsolescence.

  • - Exactly, when I was a child, you'd have a hair dryer for example,

  • and it would just last for ages! And now everything conks out,

  • for want of a better word. In a year or two,

  • it just breaks down. It's not built to last.

  • - So it's unsustainable. - Unsustainable in that case, yes.

  • - And that's very hideous for us

  • because it has so many ramifications. From the landfills,

  • to the pollution. So we're totally out of line with nature.

  • So, the first thing that has to happen I think is people need to realize

  • that all operations have to be environmentally aware,

  • period. And if you are in a position that it's not,

  • then you're doing something wrong, and the system

  • obviously is wrong when you step back far enough.

  • Because the system doesn't reward any of that.

  • So, I think, when that awareness comes forward, for example,

  • Then people will begin to shift, and it's slowly happening.

  • Very slowly, unfortunately, because we're still paralyzed by the system.

  • But more tangibly, the first thing I think needs to happen is that

  • we need to build a new city, and if you look at "The Venus Project",

  • this is one of the things that they've advocated. We need to find

  • a place that has, a multi-mile radius and to build the first

  • circular design which Fresco has been designing and advocating

  • for years, which is completely self sustainable.

  • It could be a test city, so to speak. It could be an amusement park,

  • it could be an experiment to show people what could be.

  • If they wanted it to be. So you'd have everything self-sustaining,

  • you'd have everything made out of the most prime materials.

  • Granted, we're still going to have to do this within the monetary system,

  • so there'd have to be a lot of financial backing to do it.

  • But it would set this precedent to show; "Hey, this can be done!"

  • We can have an environment where there is virtually no waste.

  • Everything is self sustainable. - But there is communities

  • like that though, isn't there? - Small ones - I've heard of one,

  • an island actually, called, I think it's called the Unicorn,

  • the Unicorn Project. - Sort of like a commune type thing? I'm not sure.

  • - I think so, yes. People sort of give up

  • the outside world and go and build a house,

  • and live on the farm type of thing. - Sure, but because of the need

  • to preserve, because of the financial restrictions of that.

  • Since it's still in the monetary system, it doesn't reflect

  • our advancements of technology. So, in this particular city,

  • you'd have the highest forms of transportation.

  • You'd have the maglev trains. - That looks fantastic actually!

  • - You'd have no cars whatsoever, because everything is designed

  • where you could get anywhere you'd want in the city with extreme ease.

  • There are so many attributes to it.

  • The homes that are made of materials that are all fireproof.

  • There's no reason for a fire department because nothing can catch fire.

  • Concepts like this, that no-one thinks about.

  • Problems in this society are regulated by laws.

  • The idea is actually to eliminate laws.

  • So, essentially we have to create an example,

  • to show the world what can be done

  • because most people have no idea what's really technically feasible.

  • And the technology we have today is,

  • technology is really our divinity, so to speak, it's what we have,

  • it's what we create to make our lives easier.

  • I'm not saying that replaces other forms of spirituality.

  • But tangibly, the utility of technology

  • is what creates freedom for us. Nothing else.

  • There's nothing else that I can think of.

  • Money and capitalism are tools to get through,

  • to make it a little more free, but at the cost of subservience

  • and this vast type of class based vision

  • Everyone who's wealthy does it at the cost of somebody else.

  • Very simply, there's a balance to it, and there are many reasons

  • for that, we need to eliminate that and get an environment design

  • where people actually live together, and they begin to establish

  • a different train of though, a different consciousness

  • where we'll get to a point where technology will be so advanced

  • that there'll be no monotonous jobs. No-one's behind a cash register.

  • There's no money, so there's no reason for that anyway.

  • Most jobs, like law would vanish. There would only be technical issues

  • that would have to be dealt with. You maintain the environment

  • and eventually people would do that because they want to contribute.

  • They understand what their role is. Not that they want reward from it,

  • not that they want to take. They want to give, because they realize

  • that giving is what the system is.

  • And it's much more natural to the human condition than just taking.

  • And they realize something more important, in this system

  • it's very primitive, because survival is associated with

  • taking and advantage, and getting a job and keeping it,

  • and manipulating the environment, for your self interest.

  • That is only beneficial to a certain degree. And that's what

  • we've seen, because of the homelessness, the wars,

  • the poverty, the disease epidemics that don't get any treatment.

  • The death of millions of people in Africa

  • that no-one cares about. This is the cost of this.

  • So, what's going to happen is the consciousness will shift,

  • people will give because they will recognize that if they don't,

  • this is what's going to happen all over again. So it's in their own

  • self interest in a different way, to actually contribute to society,

  • and that's really the awakening that needs to happen.

  • And that's what the entire element is completely about

  • with "The Venus Project" and "The Zeitgeist Movement",

  • which is a grass roots means to try and get this information

  • and understanding out there, and get people motivated

  • on a global level to move forward in this direction.

  • I'm not naive enough to think this would happen overnight,

  • I think it would take a few generations.

  • - Well, what I'm worried about is, it all sounds absolutely fantastic

  • If this could happen, and we could all work together

  • for a project such as like, "The Venus Project".

  • But I think, unfortunately, the people who are in control at the top,

  • they have got such power

  • - Sure - And every day you're seeing them,

  • take more power. I mean, only this morning,

  • I saw something on the TV about taser guns coming in.

  • And that really scares me, that these people,

  • well, police, can just shoot people down with these taser guns.

  • So, I feel like we're going backwards as people trying to go forwards.

  • But then you're battling against this all the time.

  • How do we make that switch

  • in such a short amount of time?

  • - Well, in the short time we still have to do the general activism.

  • We still have to combat these things on a fundamental level.

  • At the traditional level, the protest and activism level.

  • But I think over time, the power elite is only as powerful

  • as the people that support their system,

  • which is why I advocate at the end of the new film to start boycotting

  • different attributes of the system. For instance,

  • if no-one ever joined the military, ever again, universally,

  • there would be no war. There'd be no reason for it.

  • Because the military establishment is essentially..

  • The more power one country has, it just means that another country

  • has to get that much power. So you just stop it. Period.

  • For one, war is irrelevant anyway for multiple reasons,

  • But in the end, if they didn't have the military,

  • there would be no grounds for so many different things.

  • They would have no means of control. - Absolutely

  • - And then the police would eventually go too. Awareness would shift

  • in the human mind, where people that are police officers

  • or military men they would say: "why am I supporting this system,

  • when I realize, in the long run, I'm actually hurting myself?"

  • - And others, your family and people who are close to you, yeah.

  • - Of course - Because who are you fighting against? We're all

  • walking around on the same planet. - Right. Even more profoundly,

  • there really is no "they". I really believe that.

  • I mean there is obviously a "they" in a temporal sense,

  • there is an arrogant group of people that have maintained power

  • for long periods of time, and they continue to do so,

  • and we still support that. There is really, only, us.

  • And as long as we focus on "they", at a cognitive level,

  • a "psychic level", so to speak, they will always exist.

  • Until that consciousness awakens as well, until we realize

  • that there really is no "they". - Because we,

  • well, not me personally, but people give them the power.

  • - Yes. They give it up and - Give it up, yeah.

  • - And they support the systems that have been created by them.

  • But it's actually us. So that's one of the more cataclysmic

  • things that people don't really realize on a fundamental level,

  • that there really is no "they". So I don't advocate activists

  • that perpetuate this, you know, we have to battle the new world order,

  • or battle this and that. They don't really get it,

  • as far as I'm concerned. I don't like that.

  • I think they have to realize. There is a reason peace protesters

  • are met with guys with automatic weapons. Because they are waiting

  • for the peace protesters to do something to bring them

  • to their own level with the automatic weapons so they can use it.

  • They want the conflict. So conflict isn't going to resolve anything.

  • The more we battle something, the more the battle is going to go on.

  • So, that's something people need to think about.

  • - But we have to do peaceful battles. - Yes.

  • Well, it's more of an awareness shift. - And spread knowledge, yes.

  • It is about the awareness. And making people wake up.

  • Well, I would just love to spend more time with you.

  • - I know, hopefully.. - And I'm nowhere, absolutely on the clock here.

  • - But it's been fantastic, so please come and talk to us again. - Yeah

  • - When you come back to England, I hope that's going to be soon.

  • And thank you so much for your time. - Thank you, I really appreciate it.

  • Many thanks to Peter for giving us his time.

  • For more information see www.zeitgeistmovie.com

  • and the Zeitgeist movement site www.thezeitgeistmovement.com

  • Presented by Karen Frandsen

  • Camera and Sound - Ian Pleasance

  • Theme Music - Mark Cocking and Rod Giles

  • Graphics - Neal Pleasance Design

  • Researchers - Karen Frandsen

  • and Lisa Herbert

  • Editing and Post Production - The Eerie Investigations Team

  • Director - Ian Pleasance

  • Copyright © Eerie Investigations

  • For more interviews and investigations visit www.eerieinvestigations.com

Eerie Investigations meet Peter Joseph

字幕と単語

ワンタップで英和辞典検索 単語をクリックすると、意味が表示されます

B1 中級

ピーター・ジョセフのインタビュー by Eerie Investigations (2008-11-29) (Interview with Peter Joseph by Eerie Investigations (2008-11-29))

  • 5 0
    王惟惟 に公開 2021 年 01 月 14 日
動画の中の単語