ZDAY 2014, Tucson Speech

       Here is a speech that I gave on Sunday, March 16th, 2014 at the first 
annual "ZDAY Tucson" event, or "Zeitgeist Day. I am far from perfect as a 
public speaker and was incredibly nervous, but the information is solid. 
Enjoy 

Click this link to watch the video. It is 29 minutes long.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4vBBV9Wrlc

The topic of the speech was a summary of the 2014 book titled
 "The Zeitgeist Movement Defined". This book is available for sale or

FREE PDF DOWNLOAD at:

 http://www.thezeitgeistmovement.com/orientation

Here is a basic transcript of my speech:

     Hello. I will be talking about the new book that came out this February called
"The Zeitgeist Movement Defined". This 320 page book is available for free
online or can be ordered in paperback on Amazon and other book sellers, at cost.

    The purpose of the book is to give the reader a detailed and informed
understanding of the "train of thought" that the Zeitgeist Movement advocates.
The format of the text is a series of essays, supported by over 800 footnotes and
citations, which source 3rd party research. This allows the reader to do further
learning concerning any of the information if they like.

    The contributions of brilliant thinkers such as Buckminster Fuller, Jaques Fresco,
Jeremy Rifkin, Ray Kurzweil, Nikola Tesla, Carl Sagan and many more are quoted
and sourced for their work towards improving our world.

    So, what is the train of thought of the Zeitgeist Movement, or TZM?
Obviously, I will only be giving a very brief summary due to time, but hopefully
I can cover a few of the most important points and encourage you to learn more.

    Put in a sentence, TZM seeks to spread information and the awareness that our
society is dangerously out of date when it comes to what is possible due to the 
scientific method and technical advances today, in terms of societal and 
ecological sustainability.

     Simplifying things, the Movement's focus can be looked at in 2 main parts.
First, it is important to understand what the most basic, root causes of the 
problems that face our world are today. The second is to realize actual solutions, 
mainly, the need to transition out of a scarcity-driven, competitive market and
into a Resource Based Economic model, or 'RBE'.

    If we really want to understand what the root-causes to the problems today are,
then we have to look at our economic system a what it was designed to do. This
is where the origin becomes clear, as to these root causes.

    The most basic, fundamental rules operating at the core of the capitalist economic
model are; 
-The need for constant growth
- scarcity
-profit
-competition

    These things are important to understand because they are in direct conflict with
sustainability and human well-being. Without constant growth, the economic model 
collapses, as it requires money to be constantly moving around in the economy.
It also requires people to have jobs, so that they can continually buy things, in order
to keep up consumption rates.

    One way to think about this is to picture a company which sells, let's say a toaster...
or really product, but lets just say a toaster. If the toaster is built to last 100 years,
 that company will not have repeat sales and will probably go out of business.So, it is in the companies survival interest,  that they design products which will 
need to be replaced in a predictable amount of time. This business strategy is
no secret and is called "planned obsolescence".

    The consequences of this need for infinite growth were not considered during the 
17th century, when the capitalist ideology was being developed by people like 
Adam Smith and others. However, now these consequences are becoming clear 
when it is pointed out that we live on a finite planet. Nothing can grow forever.

    In many ways, the capitalist model operates with the same principals as a cancer cell.
Cancer cells themselves lack the ability to stop growing and are blind to the well being 
of the organism which they are a part of. It is an interesting analogy.

    According to a study:
          "The excess use of the Earth's resources or 'overshoot' is possible 
          because resources can be harvested faster than they can be replaced.
          The cumulative overshoot from the mid 1980's to 2002 resulted in an 
          ecological debt that would take 2.5 Earths to pay. In a 'business as 
          usual' scenario, our demands on this planet could amount to the 
          productivity of 27 planets by 2050."
Marine Ecology Progress Series, VOL. 434: p 261, 2011

    To understand how things like this can be allowed to happen, it's important to realize
that our economic system is "life blind". Nowhere in the capitalist model is there any 
mechanism to support human well-being or the well-being of the planet. These things
are called "externalities", meaning that they lie outside of the concerns of economic theory,
which simply wasn't designed to deal with any of our life support systems.
    
    This brings me to an even deeper issue of the fact that our monetary system and capitalism 
in particular, is a 'scarcity-based' system. In this system, there is no profit to be made 
from actually solving problems. 

        

Cyberia

I just finished reading the book "Cyberia" by Douglas Rushkoff.
It was a very good book with interesting interviews and information.
The book covers many topics including hackers, virtual reality, the
technological singularity and cyber-ativism.

Here is a good page for a description of the book, from the author.


http://www.rushkoff.com/cyberia/

Convo with Zeitgeist "Debunkers"

Anon: Ah zeitgeist the gateway to Libertarian paradise.

Neil Adam Collins It sounds like you don't understand what the Zeitgeist is or what Libertarianism is.

Anon:I don't need anyone to 'explain' Libertarianism to me. Zeitgeist was a gorgeous, seductively wrapped up piece of Libertarian propaganda. Lots written.http://thrivedebunked.wordpress.com/.../thrive-zeitgeist.../Libertarianism in this country? I know what their platform is and am opposed. My note.

Neil Adam Collins First of all, "Thrive" has no connection to The Zeitgeist Movement. In my own opinion, "Thrive" is a cheap knock-off, seeking to ride the success of TZM along with adding it's own metaphysical rhetoric. Anyway, I am proceeding to read the article you linked...

Neil Adam CollinsI am starting on the first mention of "Zeitgeist" after the intelligent criticisms that it brings up about "Thrive"in the article you have linked, Jeffrey Holsen. 
The article states:
"I argued in the February blog that it wasZeitgeist: The Movie and its conspiracy-activist offshoot, the Zeitgeist Movement, that cemented this development into the basic blueprint of future conspiracy endeavors."

As for the first movie, "Zeitgeist, The Movie", The Zeitgeist Movement claims no responsibility or validity to it. The Zeitgeist movie is only an artistic representation of the film maker.

As for the claim that the Movement is a "conspiracy-activist offshoot", well, you can say that the inherent structural flaws of the current economic model are a "conspiracy". You can say that if you like but over a billion humans starving on this planet are hardly hidden or debated. 

The article actually does a good job of its critique of "Thrive", but unfortunately makes the mistake of failing to recognize the vast difference between "Thrive" and The Zeitgeist Movement.

The article claims that Thrive seeks to shed light on the group of conspiring elites who pull the strings from behind the scenes and spray the public with 'chem-trails'. 
The difference here is that the Zeitgeist Movement is not concerned as to wether or not the "men behind the curtain", the global elites are or are not "spraying anyone. TZM is also NOT concerned wether the super rich of the world do what they do intentionally or unintentionally. These things are not the focus of TZM. The focus of TZM is to look at the ROOT causes to the problems in our world today. Problems like poverty, environmental degradation, war, "corrupt" politics, etc... these problems are a result of our outdated and inherently flawed social system, particularly our monetary system. The fact is that we (we meaning the Human race) now have the ability to feed clothe and house every human on the planet at a high standard of living. Unfortunately we have an out-dated economic system which demands certain things such as scarcity (real or created), infinite growth, competition, an endless supply of problems to maintain/service, vast and increasing wealth inequality, etc...

The difference between a conspiracy and these realizations is that TZM does not recognize individuals or a group of "conspirators". It is intsead the recognition that our social system has inherent flaws built into it at the fundamental level.

Anon: It is laudable when people come to the conclusion that we can do better. This was recognized long before TZM. I agree but I would call the 'monetarist' problem a 'capitalist' problem. I believe the root solutions lie in political will of the public more than in stunning technology.http://socialistunity.com/zeitgeist-exposed/

Anon:Not sure how it is that the first movie has no connection to the movement? Comments appear about a somewhat more left sympathetic posture in later efforts. I would support that.

Neil Adam Collins Reading further on in the article linked by Jeffrey Holsen, the article states that:
"One of the first statements I ever made about Thrive was that it appeared to be “Zeitgeist 2.0.” Clearly the movie imitates a lot of features of Peter Joseph’s notoriously fact-free 2007 Internet conspiracy film Zeitgeist, and even the suggestion of a “Thrive Movement,” aping the Zeitgeist Movement, indicates a kindred spirit."

Once again, I will state that Thrive is not the same and has no connection to TZM. I agree that Thrive seems a weak and dubious imitation of TZM. That does not mean that they are both guilty of the flaws of the later, poor imitation (Thrive).
As for "Peter Joseph’s notoriously fact-free 2007 Internet conspiracy film Zeitgeist"...
This film is not claimed or validated by those in the Zeitgeist Movement. 
The Zeitgeist movie is only an artistic representation of the film maker.
As for the first Zeitgeist film being "fact-free"...
Here is a link to the movie guide information sources and citations. You may discount them as balony without even looking at them. You may look at them and disagree with wether they are true or not. You may do what ever you like but the insinuation that the ideas in the movie are based on no facts and no information is very misleading.

http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/Zeitgeist,%20The%20Movie...

Anon: Libertarianism has taught me something. I think it is the idea of seeking a shift away from government regulation and towards social self-regulation. That is to put the power in the thinking of the people who want to create social change and encourage them to look at their investments, their lifestyles, their lifesystems and their consciousness and to ask what are you doing to create the change you advocate for politically.

Neil Adam Collins "Not sure how it is that the first movie has no connection to the movement?"

This is because the first Zeitgeist Movie was conceived as an artistic expression before there was any idea that there would be a movement which seeked to ONLY deal with relevant, important and accurate information.

Anon: 

Libertarianism capital L and local politics small p are different. ngo non-profits are another matter as well. To dismiss federal level programs on the theory that small armies of noble, concerned and astute citizens will replace them? ....Well, I'm sure there's a bridge for sale somewhere too.

Anon:

While I dont agee with their radical and to me often ridiculous notions of removing entire sections of government - many of them would agree with me that education is the ultimate key (rather than more government regulation) to solving problems that our society faces. Indeed much of the laws and regulations we now seen in our society is now strangling innovation, really truly stifling it. But we can't see this because Democrats, liberals and even the radical left is supposed to be for more regulation. I have seen first hand on how regulation in the wrong hands can be extremely stifling not just to business but to non profits. I was involved in a nonprofit that had to deal with really stupid regulations and it cost a lot of extra money.

Neil Adam Collins

On the whole, it seems that Libertarians fail to acknowledge any flaw in the capitalist or monetary model. They seem to blame every failure of capitalism instead on "the state" and it's market interference. I'm sure they can speak for themselves though. There are also "social-libertarians" who have much more in common with TZM.

Anon:

Stupid regulation? Sure. But then the con men and industry shills come in where you left off and start spreading lies about the nature of regulation in an industrial, technological society painting all regulation as 'intrusion' and you get poison....

Anon:

I am not an expert on liberarianism but I agree I still see some very flawed leadership.

Neil Adam Collins In my view one of the key flaws of Libertarian thinking is the dogmatic and almost religious loyalty to the market and the idea of money. They are also mostly unwilling to see the harmful effects of a competitive monetary system.

Anon:

A lot of people see the financial influence of a few rich billionaries as also helping to distort the movement's development

Neil Adam Collins Flawed leadership within the libertarian community?

Anon:

but what if we could call ourselves libertarian and still be progressive?

is this possible?

yes flawed leadership that has been bankrolled by the monied elite

Neil Adam Collins You can call yourself anything you want. There are 100s of political offshoots of libertarian thinking. LOL

Anon:

it has tainted the legitimate ideology of the movement?

 I see myself as wanna be political strategist.

Look at Rand and his Father Ron Paul

Neil Adam Collins Well, I think that it is inevitable for any political party to be corrupted, especcially when they believe so heavily in competition and the holy "market".

Anon:

My feeling is I can deal with them a lot more than a lot of republicans and mainline conservatives because they see a key problem that I also see as a problem - the military industrial complex.

Neil Adam Collins I, myself would in no way whatsoever stick up for libertarianism, Anarch-capitalism, or any of these other things. I am only saying that they are not the same as The Zeitgeist Movement

Anon:

They are blind to the private tyranny of wealth and power. Libertarian socialists have nothing to do with the US Libertarian party. The latter are paleo conservatives. While I am much more sympathetic to Libertarian Socialism, I believe it is politically too utopian to be achievable in an election or even a series of elections. I do not think the citizenry of this country is in any way psychologically ready for such a society either. I am more transitionalist in my thinkin.

Human corruptibility is more fundamental than our hypercapitalism even.

we have to have some transition away from the current system I think we all agree on that. The question is how do we go from here? How many times have the global intelligencia asked this question?

Neil Adam Collins "My feeling is I can deal with them a lot more than a lot of republicans and mainline conservatives because they see a key problem that I also see as a problem - the military industrial complex"

I agree, but I also think that as the far right wing conservative party Republicans continue to loose support... as people continue to see them as an obsolete group of religious bigots...., The Libertarian party wiil increasingly become the new opposition to "progressive", true humanitarian, egalitarian thinking.

Anon:

i guess i seek out how we can reach common ground and create a populist movement for change that transcends more predictable cleavages between left and right

The Zeitgeist movement is not a political party. We seek to spread a train of thought which will render the old systems obsolete.

Anon:

 I am devotee to the ideas of Hegel and Marx and the eastern version of that which first developed as Taoism

Zeit Geist - Time Ghost

Neil Adam Collins Or "spirit of the age"

Anon:

it is the ghost of those old systems that project into the now and alter our consciousness so that we are slow to change and adapt as is needed to reflect best and highest potential of who we are.

 I like spirit of the age.

 "The Libertarian party will increasingly become the new opposition to "progressive", true humanitarian, egalitarian thinking." < I agree ...and a more devious one. Unfortunately, the split between reactionary and progressive will not be transcended IMO. It will have to be fought out again. History doesn't repeat but it rhymes.

Neil Adam Collins The term “zeitgeist” is defined as the “general intellectual, moral and cultural climate of an era.” The term “movement” simply implies “motion” or change. Therefore, The Zeitgeist Movement is an organization that urges change in the dominant intellectual, moral and cultural climate of the time.

Anon:

ok i have to get to work - great conversation - but leave on this. I see libertarianism as opportunity so I think I disagree a bit.

Neil Adam Collins Yes, Jeffery Holsen, I think that Libertarianism is the next model of conservative thinking, the next step in evolution. It is more subtly and the rhetoric is more carefully crafted, but it is the same old game, Competiton, heirarchy and inequality under the cloak of personal"freedum.

Anon:

 I see it as an opportunity because it opens a dialectic doorway for a deeper discussion among conversatives than was previously possible before it

 I offer three examples to rebut your thesis 1 drug legalization 2 critique of military industrial complex and 3 resistence to NSA and intrusive intelligence (possibly 2,3 are similar or same)

Neil Adam Collins I have friends that are libertarian and I think they are looking for something valid. It is just that I see past the need for money and a competitive market, so I don't agree with the philosophy.

Anon:

the negative aspect of the mainstream libertarianism is the money emphasis

Neil Adam Collins What about "drug legalization"?

Anon:

its what makes them conservative and able to go CPAC

Neil Adam Collins I see.

Anon:

its common to see liberarians favoring the kind of legalization we see in the states now and also the decriminalization now happening in WA and CO.

i think part of the transition towards a money free economy is the pragmatic shift in that we realize most of the world is not ready to abandon money and property. With that I would accept that some agreements need to be made on how stabilize the social shifts and ecological ones as well. The more we can create a shift within the money sector the less we have to rely on goverment regs to do this.

Neil Adam Collins Yes, well, it is a more modern incarnation but the thing that they are still trying to conserve are the age old ideas that everyone should compete for himself in a market and that when one person does very well in the market then he should be able to weild his power over another. The loyalty to capitalism is conservative.

Anon:

I reject hypercompetitivism

Neil Adam Collins Well, of corse.

Anon:

so its going to take some time to convince the public that this is the best way they have been brainwashed for so long about how important it is to be competitive.

in every aspect of human life

Neil Adam Collins Market VS State is a false dichotomy. There are more things possible than just the 2 choices of either state control or the "free market". Besides, they are basically the same thing.

Anon:

its about ideology is libertarianism is good or bad - its about whether its an opportunity to have thoughtful discussions with convervatives about issues that cross cut the ideological divide that I think is artifical and bull shit

Neil Adam Collins Personally, I think that libertarianism is "Bad" LOL but I usually try not to think that way 

Anon:

Honestly I dont know for sure if I am correct on this. I hope I am. And i realize that at the current time traditional left groups do not have the votes to forward a comprehensive national political platform for change.

Anon:

Decoys. The real targets? Public land, public schools, social security, minimum wages. The list goes on and on. 

And yet ideas must compete unless they are hard science...

Its not to dismiss any of those concerns but its to cosider with an open mind what Foster Gamble was putting forward in thrive.

Neil Adam Collins

Bad because it denies the fact that we live together in a civization on a planet. We are not each individual islands. On the other hand, socialism tends to deny that we are individuals. In the midddle is the truth. We are both social and individual. We need a resource based economy with completely decentralized power.

Anon:

do we envision a government that will solve our problems for us with traditional left prescriptions or do we envision some different less centralization and more about empowering communities and making no one gets left behind.

Neil Adam Collins "resource based economy with completely decentralized power." This is the type of thing that the Zeitgeist movement advocates. It allowes us to be individual and social.

Anon:

 Count me in! And developing an education paradigm that instills strong values in people so that they dont need government so much.

ANON2:Jeffrey, I urge you to read the links I posted above

!

Anon:

ok

 i will do that and then possibly we can continue this discussion later

thank you both.

Neil Adam Collins Yes, by all means! read all of the "Zeitgeist Debunked" stuff you can get your hands on! LOL

And find out what the Zeitgeist Movement actually says an order to compare notes with the "debunking" stuff. Make up your own mind.

Anon:

One more thing I am not prone to dichomize ideas into good and bad ones. I am more of intellectual relativist.

 and I think that is what makes me strong intellectually because I like to look at everything and consider the points of view driving people. not to reduce people for thinking in a way different than mine

And thats why I like Pope "Who am I to judge" Francis

I have recently finished reading this book and I will be giving a lecture about the ideas on Sunday. I recommend any to read this book. It deals with the root causes and solutions, not "conspiracies". Then you can decide for yourself, rather than just sharing links about someone else's idea of why "ZEITGEIST IS BULLSHIT CONSPIRACY" LOL

http://www.thezeitgeistmovement.com/.../The_Zeitgeist..

Anon2:

"We need a resource based economy with completely decentralized power". I have yet to see a realpolitik model that looks workable. There are models that reduce the impact of human corruptibility but every sci-fi out there is an essay on how this can never be eliminated. Some "one" some "body" deliberates on the distribution. No way around it. If it is a giant computer people will rig the machine or the outcomes it determines...

models that reduce the impact of human corruptibility are always the way to go but we will always have that challenge in any system to one degree or another.

Neil Adam Collins I read Pope francis's 87 page document from December. It was an enormous amount of the same old religious dogma with about 10 pages of it that was very encouraging.

Neil Adam Collins Human corruptability is very workable...

Anon2:

And THAT was revolutionary even so..

Neil Adam Collins The problem is that "human nature" is very misunderstood.

Anon2:

....and that we can never remove all temptation to cheat in some way. Never remove every pathological ailment. We can only not water them.

Neil Adam Collins

And the very word "corrupt" is misleading. If you have a system like capitalism that is designed to reward people who compete and "game" eachother... Than you cant really call it corrupt, can you?

Neil Adam Collins Human nature is for the human to adapt to the environment that he/she finds themselves in. This includes the socio-economic environment.

Anon2:

 Yes but we must not be mono logical about it. Our nature is also to transcend ...in both healthy and unhealthy ways. The inherent goodness of humanity is not equivalent to unicorns and rainbows ...pardon the crass expression

Neil Adam Collins I am not saying that humans are inherently good either...

Anon2:

That's OK! I was 

Lets hope humanity and civilization (the good part makes) it to the 24th century

Neil Adam Collins It is proven in science that even gene expression is regulated by the environment. So if you have a cut-throat society, you will have an agressive, selfish human. If you have a society that cares about the human you will have humans whose genes express themselves an order to have collabourative, intelligent behavior.

Neil Adam Collins Check out people like DR. Robert Sapolsky of Stanford and others. Many new ideas are coming out of the behavioral science.

Anon2:

I don't think human aggression is that cut and dried as to be reduced completely to genes and culture - but yes those are interesting studies and show some promise of cultural evolution as a potential we have.

Neil Adam Collins Youre right, I'm sure nothing is that clear-cut, I agree.