Zeitgeist Addendum**must see**

[elirien]

Originally Posted by sprocket

As for what changes it could manifest, consider what would happen if tomorrow the world governments told us that we were in imminent danger of being invaded by little green guys, and the world as a whole must prepare for this. Instantly, this inslaving monetary system would be forgotten about, with the whole world adopting a true "resource-based" existence - the farmers would feed us, their machinery and equipment needs would be met by industry, and on and on. This didn't happen during our own major wars precisely because they were orchestrated to a large extent by bankers, who were funding both sides simultaneuously! Remove this 'dead-wood' though and you would see just how well the human race as a whole can work together, while also highlighting how un-necessary a currency-based economy really is...

Besides the quote above I agree with you totally. What I didn't like on your approach is again the same thing I mentioned before. Yes the bankers are scum but that's it. There is nothing more that would change if you continue with a centralized system. Those war scenarios where the people work their ass off for resources happened every time. Not only with wars but also natural disasters like the earthquakes in my country and other various occasions in other countries. If you take the stealing element out of the system it will work. Of course there are other non-beneficial details like representative democracy but these can be altered for a better existence and choice in government.

Originally Posted by sprocket

I'm well aware that technology suppression has nothing to do with an economic model, but it nicely highlights just one of the ugly facets of a greed-based monetary system, how technological advancement, however necessary, can be stunted or stopped althogether (as with the I.C.E) by a tiny minority of unscrupulous individuals...

That I agree upon too. You are very right.

[elirien]

Originally Posted by TranceAm

I thought they made a very good case of that... And since Islam acknowledges Jesus Christ as another Messiah, they acknowledge the other religions basis for existence, and get credibility back from it. (If Jesus was a Messiah, then Mohamed can be a Messiah.) I think they upped the ante a little bit, and place the bar a lot higher by adding the claim, the "last" one... No other will follow. I might be wrong, on hearsay.

Yup you are right as far as I know (please correct us if we write bs here). But if Jesus is not to proven a myth then I don't think that would work either. His station as a prophet is of course another issue. I won't comment on that one since I don't think that I have read enough Torah, Bible and Koran to detail this.

Originally Posted by TranceAm

Sorry about that, My bad, I should have written acknowledged.

Let me give an example of what I mean, and see how far you approve of it.

A person mind can (Considering believing anything but in this case say "God".) in a virgin state, when he has never heard of that meme before... Needles to say, In this world, one has to be a little child unable to understand language to be in this state.

The moment the meme is introduced in the persons mind, accompanied with the proof as surrounding us and supplied by the religions that go around (Complete sometimes with the carrot/stick approach and endless indoctrination from several sources..),
The person can do 2 things, Either accept it, or reject it.
Accepting it means becoming in a believer. (And Xerox the meme.)
Rejecting it means changing from virgin to an unbeliever...

However, in case unbelieving or later believing something different, now in every discussion case this meme, the person has to prove that the meme is untrue before putting forward his own proof for his own case... He has to acknowledge the meme as something that can be disproved, while it has never been proven to start with...

I approve your ideas Well the thing is you have a third option besides believing (as you said xeroxing the meme) and rejecting and thus being a non-believer. Researching it. Convincing yourself based on your research before this meme. Truth is the ultimate meme since it can't be copied and not spread. It is a constant that is not open for interpretation based on physical entities. You can acknowledge its existence or not. That are the only options.

In case of Zeitgeist's claims on religion it is just a meme rather then obvious truth. It fails when being tested. Jesus was not a myth as neither was Aleister Crowley for example. Both are individuals that have claims about the beyond. Both have documentation that proves their existence. Both have religious scripture.

Originally Posted by TranceAm

Word games? Nono, it is World Games. And according to religions that go around: Winner takes all. :-)

Yeah, that's the main thing that bothers me with religion anyway. Don't get me wrong. I'm not a supporter of religion and mass movements. The idea of a winner in this universe where I just know of a little bit about life on this particular planet seems too human derived to be universal truth anyway

Originally Posted by TranceAm

Again a pleasure.

P.S Commander Adama? Lorne Greene or Edward James Olmos?
http://www.battlestargalactica.com/index.htm

As it always is for me. Oh I know of the comparison. Makes me also think about George Green

[elirien]

Originally Posted by Reveling John

First off, this is a really interesting thread and I thank everyone for submitting their unique arguments.

Now, as far as the quote above is concerned, let me state that:

GOLD IS NOT A RESOURCE. Gold is a commodity that we have historically used as a measure of wealth, but a currency system backed by gold is NOT resourced-based because GOLD IS NOT A RESOURCE.

Neither is silver, platinum, diamonds, rubies, jewels..... the wealth that these commodities represent is not resource-based. The idea of these things measuring wealth is a complete ABSTRACTION.

Well first of all I want to thank you for joining the debate. It is very important that at least we in the "truth seeker" milieu look at what actually is meant in all the documentaries, documents, philosophy and conspiracy of course. It begins to feel like an obligation for me almost and I'm very happy to see like minded, curious people.

The definition of resource in Dictionary.com is:

–noun
1. a source of supply, support, or aid, esp. one that can be readily drawn upon when needed.
2. resources, the collective wealth of a country or its means of producing wealth.
3. Usually, resources. money, or any property that can be converted into money; assets.
4. Often, resources. an available means afforded by the mind or one's personal capabilities: to have resource against loneliness.
5. an action or measure to which one may have recourse in an emergency; expedient.
6. capability in dealing with a situation or in meeting difficulties: a woman of resource.

source: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/resource

Well since we all write on a computer which uses gold as a resource to transfer data in the central processing unit I think that this idea is a fallacy alone by the idea that Gold, Silver, platinum, etc. have no use and are a distraction. I won't go into monatomic gold since I don't know its composition directly but I know it is made from gold and it is being claimed that it has direct effects on the human body.

I want gold the same as I want a roof over my body and food to feed my self. It is useful in the necessary setting and has become a necessity for humans that want to research anything based on their life. Products of mining are resources.

Originally Posted by Reveling John

For more on that line of thought, check out Alan Watts, who I've mentioned on this forum before.

And if you are wondering what a commodity is, here is wikipedia to the rescue:

Dictionary.com definition:

–noun, plural -ties.
1. an article of trade or commerce, esp. a product as distinguished from a service.
2. something of use, advantage, or value.
3. Stock Exchange. any unprocessed or partially processed good, as grain, fruits, and vegetables, or precious metals.
4. Obsolete. a quantity of goods.

source: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/commodity

Let's look at it in the case of gold.

1. Yes that is defining it in one use.
2. This as well.
3. Well obviously.
4. Kinda.

We could conclude that the use of gold is what is its definition in this aspect. You can either use it as a Resource or a commodity.

Originally Posted by Reveling John

Also, socialism, as you can conclude for yourself by studying the economies of western/northern Europe gives the government control of capital, not resources. Here's another important fact: CAPITAL IS NOT A RESOURCE. Thus socialism (and communism for that matter) is not a resourced-based economy.

Once again wikipedia provides us with an definition of capital:

Same problem here imho. If money is based on gold and if you have a fort knox still going then capital is a resource or at least capital is comprised partly of resource (I don't know what is being used by governments as physical evidence for capital. I could use some help here, especially from you government agents lurking around here :P ).

Originally Posted by Reveling John

To some of the other points: When people dispute the credibility of Zeitgeist (1st or 2nd) they NEVER, NOT ONCE mention what they would do if they interpretted the movies and their messages as literal communications. I don't care if you think this religioun or that religioun are real. I don't care if you think the Venus project is a veil for socialism or the new world order.

What are you going to DO about the social/economic/humanitarian crisis that we face?
What ACTION have you decided upon, if any?

Let's talk about that.

Sure. This will be pretty off topic but you asked for it buddy

---Rant ahead---

My problem with his the thesis of non religious and religious solutions to this problem is this: No one knows where the heck we are from and where the heck we are going. We don't even know what the heck we are for certain.

Now a solution for this would be "attacking" occultism and don't mean hermetic orders or other secret societies for that matter. The occultism I'm talking about is embedded right here in your backyard so to speak. This occultism starts when your mom tells you that you have been brought here by birds and ends with a scientist telling you that you are a chemical chance. It's covering up information and fallacies. It's finding the intellect "holier" then the human being itself. What do I think is a solution? Don't lie neither to others nor to yourself (which is the most perpetrated crime around). Do you think that this "satanic" system so to speak could live one second if there were a decent and un-romanticized answer to why this is happening. People love to support liars because they know that these will cover up their own. And people love to also blame them for their indifference and ignorance. That rethoric about "God" or "The Devil" made me do it is the main thing about this mental prison.

What do I think I should do? I should close the channels supporting this system without damaging the free will of others. I should inform myself in every aspect of everything that I can find without prejudice and other dramatized memes or thought forms. If someone likes my approach they are open to implement that, but I couldn't care less if they didn't because it is their life even if we are one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively.

That's the action. Be sure what you meddle with and get informed. Share that information so that it can be bettered through your fellow men and women. The most beautiful thing that I find in this movie the ending of a sentence: "...because they are no longer relevant anymore." (or something like that). Truth dissolves falacies and gives you the power to choose wisely.

---Rant over---

Originally Posted by Reveling John

By the way, instead of attacking Jaque Fresco on the basis of his appearance in Zeitgeist Addendum, why not respond to his actual writings? There is plenty to be found on the Venus Project website, from which this excerpt has been pulled:

I know I am stretching my limits here but could you post this in a topic just about the venus project. I know that Zeitgeist Addendum and the project are kind of embedded but I think the venus project should be discussed just as the venus project. Even though I am sure even if the venus project is proven to be completely out of context that the director won't change his mind that connects him to this project as he didn't when his views on religion were proven false.

Originally Posted by Reveling John

While we are all furiously researching, which I believe most people on this site are doing in earnest, let's try to remember that there is a point to all of this homework. I can't tell you what the point is for you, but I know that for myself, I want to determine the most appropriate action to take for the betterment of my life and the life of everyone on this planet. I suppose yall have to figure out your own individual objectives and when you do find it, make sure that your intellectual efforts are being properly directed toward that goal.

Great Love,
John

I second that.

Be good John.

[Reveling John]

Originally Posted by elirien

Well first of all I want to thank you for joining the debate. It is very important that at least we in the "truth seeker" milieu look at what actually is meant in all the documentaries, documents, philosophy and conspiracy of course. It begins to feel like an obligation for me almost and I'm very happy to see like minded, curious people.

I feel the same way, Elirien, like it's become my new job. Ironic, seeing as I'm currently unemployed

The definition of resource in Dictionary.com is:

–noun
1. a source of supply, support, or aid, esp. one that can be readily drawn upon when needed.
2. resources, the collective wealth of a country or its means of producing wealth.
3. Usually, resources. money, or any property that can be converted into money; assets.
4. Often, resources. an available means afforded by the mind or one's personal capabilities: to have resource against loneliness.
5. an action or measure to which one may have recourse in an emergency; expedient.
6. capability in dealing with a situation or in meeting difficulties: a woman of resource.

source: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/resource

The problem with dicitionary definitions is that when you we use words to create sentences we have to choose which definitions apply to each word. If you use all six of those definition for 'resource' and apply that same approach to each word in the sentence, you'll get more than a billion different meanings for that sentence, because of course, the definitions themselves are made up of words, each of those words having multiple definitions. So we need to choose ONE definition in order for this conversation to have any meaning. Further more the way Jacque uses the term resource, he is using it as a synonym for NATURAL resources, which is even more specific. Here's what I mean:

In actuality, no one should make decisions as to how this blueprint will be designed. It must be based on the carrying capacity of our planet, its resources, human needs and the like.

-From The Future and Beyond by Jacque Fresco

So, since my use of the term RESOURCE will always be in reference to NATURAL RESOURCES let's look further into the definition of natural resource:

Natural resources are naturally occurring substances that are considered valuable in their relatively unmodified (natural) form. A natural resource's value rests in the amount of the material available and the demand for it. The latter is determined by its usefulness to production. A commodity is generally considered a natural resource when the primary activities associated with it are extraction and purification, as opposed to creation. Thus, mining, petroleum extraction, fishing, hunting, and forestry are generally considered natural-resource industries, while agriculture is not.
-wikipedia.org

Now, when it says that a resource's value "rests in the amount of the material available and the demand for it," it is defining VALUE within the context of a monetary-based economy. All of your definitions that use the terms VALUE, MEASURE, WEALTH, CAPITAL, and ASSETS are projections of a monetary-based understanding of the resources available to us. So basically when using such definitions as a foundation for argument, you are arguing from the perspective of consciousness that measures everything and defines everything on a scale of supply and demand, which in this manifestation of the world economy are total ABSTRACTIONS. Look at what's happening to the stock market. The economy is shrinking despite that fact that there has been NO CHANGE IN THE QUANTITY OF NATURAL RESOURCES in the last three weeks AND NO CHANGE IN THE DEMAND FOR THESE RESOURCES. If there is an observable change in REAL demand it would actually be an increase, which should result in an expanding economy, and yet...

Think about the housing "bubble" in the US. In July it was reported that the foreclosure crisis had left 2 MILLION homes (in the US alone) standing empty, with the price of these properties plummeting. Is there no demand for houses? My city (los angeles) alone had EIGHTY THOUSAND homeless people at the beginning of this year. San Francisco has TWENTY THOUSAND. New York has FORTY THOUSAND. Is there a demand for homes? Google the term "Tent City" or "Bushville", and you will find that the rate of homelessness in this country is SKY-ROCKETING EXPONENTIALLY. There is SUPPLY and there is a HUGE DEMAND, so why aren't these houses selling, and why is the market price crashing? This would indicate that supply and demand AS DEFINED IN A MONETARY-BASED WORLD ECONOMY IS A COMPLETE ABSTRACTION, having very little relationship to the actuall PHYSICAL MEASUREMENT of SUPPLY and the actual human need expressed as DEMAND.

Well since we all write on a computer which uses gold as a resource to transfer data in the central processing unit I think that this idea is a fallacy alone by the idea that Gold, Silver, platinum, etc. have no use and are a distraction. I won't go into monatomic gold since I don't know its composition directly but I know it is made from gold and it is being claimed that it has direct effects on the human body.

Furthermore, the DEMAND for gold, silver, or platinum is not based on their uses as conductive or semi-conductive materials, which has only come about in the last 60 years or so, although this may be changing at this point in time. However, in the periods of time when money was backed by a gold standard it was not a useful resource of any kind, except as a representation of wealth or capital.

And I didn't say DISTRACTION although that could be applied ironically. The term I'm using is ABSTRACTION:

In philosophical terminology, abstraction is the thought process wherein ideas are distanced from objects.

Abstraction uses a strategy of simplification, wherein formerly concrete details are left ambiguous, vague, or undefined; thus effective communication about things in the abstract requires an intuitive or common experience between the communicator and the communication recipient.

For example, many different things can be red. Likewise, many things sit on surfaces (as in picture 1, to the right). The property of redness and the relation sitting-on are therefore abstractions of those objects.

-wikipedia.org

I want gold the same as I want a roof over my body and food to feed my self. It is useful in the necessary setting and has become a necessity for humans that want to research anything based on their life. Products of mining are resources.

And yet your DEMAND for gold is not effecting the PRICE (i.e. VALUE) of gold. Rather the value of gold, which fluctuates daily, despite a finite REAL supply and an exponentially increasing REAL demand, is determined by how gold COMMODITIES are selling on the stock market. Notice that COMMODITY is an inherently monetary-based distinction and would have no use in a (natural) resource-based economy.

We could conclude that the use of gold is what is its definition in this aspect. You can either use it as a Resource or a commodity.

Yes you can and the fact that you can use it as a COMMODITY gives owners of gold and gold stock an incentive to ARTIFICIALLY LOWER THE SUPPLY of gold in circulation (which they do, in the same way that they control the supply of silver, diamonds, plantinum, oil, beans, rice, corn, EVERYTHING - despite millions of people having a REAL need/demand for these items). For this same reason stock traders who speciallized in short-selling are given incentive to ARTIFICIALLY INCREASE SUPPLY so that when the commodity looses value they can make money off of the sale (short sellers make money when a stock sells at a loss). This is EXACTLY what they did in the MORTGAGE and DERIVATIVE markets, which led to the sub-mortgage crisis because (and this is freaking insane) THEY PROFIT FROM OUR LOSSES. If gold were ONLY a resource, and it's value were ONLY determined by your REAL need and my REAL need to harness it as a conductive material, our valuation would be completely disconnected from the way we currently assign value to this material. In other words it would have REAL VALUE, but this is IMPOSSIBLE IN A MONETARY SYSTEM.

If money is based on gold and if you have a fort knox still going then capital is a resource or at least capital is comprised partly of resource (I don't know what is being used by governments as physical evidence for capital. I could use some help here, especially from you government agents lurking around here :P ).

That's the whole point, friend. NOTHING IS BEING USED AS PHYSICAL EVIDENCE FOR CAPITAL. That's the whole freakin point.

NOTHING.

Our entire economic model is base on FAITH. It is pure ABSTRACTION. That is why when people get afraid the whole thing starts to fall apart.

From BBC News:

Fear grips global stock markets

...In a day of major panic selling, the Dow Jones index fell as much as 5% in the US before ending down 1.5%.

The fear is that the financial crisis will tip the world into a recession....

Investors increasingly fear a global recession, despite interest rate cuts and cash injections by central banks...

"Fear has been running all over Wall Street," said Dave Henderson, a floor trader on the New York Stock Exchange...

-BBC News

It's right in front of our faces and in the very language that we use to describe the collapse. We have lost FAITH which is the only thing that our capital is supported by. Better put:

CAPITAL IS FAITH.

Those that wield capital and leverage wealth are wielding FAITH and leveraging FAITH. Now that we are loosing FAITH, now that we are SEEING that the whole system revolves around a MIND GAME, the whole thing is falling apart. The ABSTRACTION is no longer believable.

Everyone who reads this and feels that there is atleast some truth to what I'm saying should check out Alan Watts. In this short lecture he lays it out sooooo clearly:
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_lis...906&playnext=1




I will leave this responce to the realm of capital V.S. resource management. I did read what you had to say about religioun and I quite agree with your position that nobody really knows what's going on and that you've made it your goal to find out for yourself. I love it. DO YOU!

As you formulate further responses on this subject try to apply this meme to your thought process:

"Is this thought the product of a monetary system? What would this thought look like in the absence of wealth and capital?"

Great Love,
John

P.S. I've started a new thread for discussing the venus project here:
http://projectavalon.org/forum/showt...9869#post59869

[elirien]

Originally Posted by Reveling John

I feel the same way, Elirien, like it's become my new job. Ironic, seeing as I'm currently unemployed

Well I am employed but if this continues this way I'll be probably broke, have an internet documentary, some esoteric books and shot by a U.N. peace officer that tried to "reason" with me for an rfid chip Not that I see death as doom and gloom but I also don't see it as a "release" from something. I like to give my back to uncle "I dunno ****" on this matter Well let's continue with the main topic.

Originally Posted by Reveling John

"Is this thought the product of a monetary system? What would this thought look like in the absence of wealth and capital?"

I like to first adress this sentence since it is exactly reflecting my feelings. I don't know if feelings are to be trusted on anything (not that I'm against them. Their heaps of fun many of the times ) but this is an important sentence that kind of sets the stage or is sort of a point of reference to return when one get's lost in the "fact jungle".

I don't define myself with an external source anymore. I still have some connections to the external on this matter but I'm trying hard to root them out. I couldn't care less if this monetary system fails (which it will). I don't believe that I am a product of any system. I'm not trying to define myself with the past. I am neither a grandson of Jesus neither of Atatürk. I am what I am and I don't know what the hell it is

Originally Posted by Reveling John

The problem with dicitionary definitions is that when you we use words to create sentences we have to choose which definitions apply to each word. If you use all six of those definition for 'resource' and apply that same approach to each word in the sentence, you'll get more than a billion different meanings for that sentence, because of course, the definitions themselves are made up of words, each of those words having multiple definitions. So we need to choose ONE definition in order for this conversation to have any meaning. Further more the way Jacque uses the term resource, he is using it as a synonym for NATURAL resources, which is even more specific. Here's what I mean:

Well that sentence from Mr. Fresco doesn't define his view on resources. It just states the blueprint of his theory should be customized for the elements he lists there. Gold is a natural resource by the way.

Originally Posted by Reveling John

So, since my use of the term RESOURCE will always be in reference to NATURAL RESOURCES let's look further into the definition of natural resource:

Again applies to gold.

Originally Posted by Reveling John

Now, when it says that a resource's value "rests in the amount of the material available and the demand for it," it is defining VALUE within the context of a monetary-based economy. All of your definitions that use the terms VALUE, MEASURE, WEALTH, CAPITAL, and ASSETS are projections of a monetary-based understanding of the resources available to us.

So basically when using such definitions as a foundation for argument, you are arguing from the perspective of consciousness that measures everything and defines everything on a scale of supply and demand, which in this manifestation of the world economy are total ABSTRACTIONS. Look at what's happening to the stock market. The economy is shrinking despite that fact that there has been NO CHANGE IN THE QUANTITY OF NATURAL RESOURCES in the last three weeks AND NO CHANGE IN THE DEMAND FOR THESE RESOURCES. If there is an observable change in REAL demand it would actually be an increase, which should result in an expanding economy, and yet...

If the theory here is that natural resources worth or value should be evaluated by their appliances and rarity then I'm all for that. But I can't see how that could tie in with the idea of using papers representing the resource itself. Ok. The economy model of today is bs. I am saying that of course and the ideals built on scarcity (which is virtual anyway) are also bs. Still I can't see the connection of a representative paper.

Originally Posted by Reveling John

Think about the housing "bubble" in the US. In July it was reported that the foreclosure crisis had left 2 MILLION homes (in the US alone) standing empty, with the price of these properties plummeting. Is there no demand for houses? My city (los angeles) alone had EIGHTY THOUSAND homeless people at the beginning of this year. San Francisco has TWENTY THOUSAND. New York has FORTY THOUSAND. Is there a demand for homes? Google the term "Tent City" or "Bushville", and you will find that the rate of homelessness in this country is SKY-ROCKETING EXPONENTIALLY. There is SUPPLY and there is a HUGE DEMAND, so why aren't these houses selling, and why is the market price crashing? This would indicate that supply and demand AS DEFINED IN A MONETARY-BASED WORLD ECONOMY IS A COMPLETE ABSTRACTION, having very little relationship to the actuall PHYSICAL MEASUREMENT of SUPPLY and the actual human need expressed as DEMAND.

As I said above you are totally right on that one. The basis on defining worth with supply and demand graphs is moronic to say the least. I'm a fresh business student and am reading about this bs lately and I can just perceive not optimization of the usage of natural resources but digitization of the human being with these hollow and idiotic economic models. You don't need to change your transactional media to make them better. You just need a brain and good will.

Originally Posted by Reveling John

Furthermore, the DEMAND for gold, silver, or platinum is not based on their uses as conductive or semi-conductive materials, which has only come about in the last 60 years or so, although this may be changing at this point in time. However, in the periods of time when money was backed by a gold standard it was not a useful resource of any kind, except as a representation of wealth or capital.

Yeah or perhaps used as a resource for making cups, perhaps the holy grail :P. But there is this monatomic gold issue that reaches far into the times of moses and the pharaohs. I'm not sure if you are familiar with that. It does put a lot of worth on the gold.

And of course there is the sitchin story with enlil and enki creating us as gold miners... Since I don't trust him I can skip that as some sort of father christmas story.

Originally Posted by Reveling John

And I didn't say DISTRACTION although that could be applied ironically. The term I'm using is ABSTRACTION:

Sorry. That was my fault. Although it is kinda close

Originally Posted by Reveling John

And yet your DEMAND for gold is not effecting the PRICE (i.e. VALUE) of gold. Rather the value of gold, which fluctuates daily, despite a finite REAL supply and an exponentially increasing REAL demand, is determined by how gold COMMODITIES are selling on the stock market. Notice that COMMODITY is an inherently monetary-based distinction and would have no use in a (natural) resource-based economy.

Yes.

Originally Posted by Reveling John

Yes you can and the fact that you can use it as a COMMODITY gives owners of gold and gold stock an incentive to ARTIFICIALLY LOWER THE SUPPLY of gold in circulation (which they do, in the same way that they control the supply of silver, diamonds, plantinum, oil, beans, rice, corn, EVERYTHING - despite millions of people having a REAL need/demand for these items). For this same reason stock traders who speciallized in short-selling are given incentive to ARTIFICIALLY INCREASE SUPPLY so that when the commodity looses value they can make money off of the sale (short sellers make money when a stock sells at a loss). This is EXACTLY what they did in the MORTGAGE and DERIVATIVE markets, which led to the sub-mortgage crisis because (and this is freaking insane) THEY PROFIT FROM OUR LOSSES. If gold were ONLY a resource, and it's value were ONLY determined by your REAL need and my REAL need to harness it as a conductive material, our valuation would be completely disconnected from the way we currently assign value to this material. In other words it would have REAL VALUE, but this is IMPOSSIBLE IN A MONETARY SYSTEM.



That's the whole point, friend. NOTHING IS BEING USED AS PHYSICAL EVIDENCE FOR CAPITAL. That's the whole freakin point.

NOTHING.

Our entire economic model is base on FAITH. It is pure ABSTRACTION. That is why when people get afraid the whole thing starts to fall apart.

From BBC News:



It's right in front of our faces and in the very language that we use to describe the collapse. We have lost FAITH which is the only thing that our capital is supported by. Better put:

CAPITAL IS FAITH.

Those that wield capital and leverage wealth are wielding FAITH and leveraging FAITH. Now that we are loosing FAITH, now that we are SEEING that the whole system revolves around a MIND GAME, the whole thing is falling apart. The ABSTRACTION is no longer believable.

Everyone who reads this and feels that there is atleast some truth to what I'm saying should check out Alan Watts. In this short lecture he lays it out sooooo clearly:
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_lis...906&playnext=1

Very true all of the above except again money as a media for transaction. I still think the problem is with the wrong interpretation of the system. Using resource not as resources but as symbols for virtual assets or as you above mentioned as symbols for blind submission is the problem. Capital became faith years ago first when the priest dudes began collecting gold for their "church". It's a long subject which I won't go into here. But as I stated before the only problem I have with your research is that you see money as what it is defined by the federal bank of america. Money is not only that.

Originally Posted by Reveling John

I will leave this responce to the realm of capital V.S. resource management. I did read what you had to say about religioun and I quite agree with your position that nobody really knows what's going on and that you've made it your goal to find out for yourself. I love it. DO YOU!

Great Love,
John

P.S. I've started a new thread for discussing the venus project here:
http://projectavalon.org/forum/showt...9869#post59869

Well at least I'm gonna try which is more fun and interesting then simulations of this search that is being presented to us in moronic plots in TV-Cinema

Thank you for your posts John. I'm sure we will arrive at a conclusion in a short time. Maybe we should gather these in a text file and use them on the forums we visit, blogs etc. I2ll be over at your new post later on in the day (got to work occasionally ).

Be good all of you.

[Reveling John]

Originally Posted by elirien

Very true all of the above except again money as a media for transaction. I still think the problem is with the wrong interpretation of the system. Using resource not as resources but as symbols for virtual assets or as you above mentioned as symbols for blind submission is the problem. Capital became faith years ago first when the priest dudes began collecting gold for their "church". It's a long subject which I won't go into here. But as I stated before the only problem I have with your research is that you see money as what it is defined by the federal bank of america. Money is not only that.

I suppose this is simply a matter of difference in opinion since we have not experienced the society where a genuine attempt to use money simply as a means of resource representation and management was made. Maybe a fair and just society that uses money as it's transactional medium is possible. I don't think that money or currency is bad, anymore than religioun is bad. I'm trying to emphasise the observation that in our history and in our current situation the economic market has been used as tool for control, oppression and the preservation of ignorance. Is that the only way which it can be applied to our society? No, I don't think so. Is it inherently designed for that purpose? Yes, I believe so.

I understand that you have choosen not to put this polar judgement on money and I respect that and feel as well that the judgment is not helpful. At the same I would really like everyone to get into the habit of asking themselves, "Why money?" Money can be a dirge to humankind or an enhancement, and it has certainly been both of those things, but so few people ever get the chance to ask the simple question, "Is money necessary?"

Is money necessary?

Thank you for your posts John. I'm sure we will arrive at a conclusion in a short time. Maybe we should gather these in a text file and use them on the forums we visit, blogs etc. I2ll be over at your new post later on in the day (got to work occasionally ).

Be good all of you.

I feel you clearly and resoundingly. Maybe a text compilation of many of this forum's topics would be a useful resource, so yeah, that's an awesome idea. On that matter of reaching a "conclusion" I prefer to side with Terrence McKenna:

We don't need any gurus here, we don't need any Laying Down of the Law. Anybody who tells you they have a clue as to what's happening should be suspect for mental illness and delusions of grandeur. The thought is (and I haven't said this yet but this is the conclusion from all of this): culture is an effort to satisfy this weird desire human beings have to close off experience, to live with closure, to force closure. That's why cultural trips are so bizarre, why they don't make sense to anybody but the Witoto or the Waorani or the Americans or the Japanese; if you're not inside the culture it seems crazy. The cultures don't make sense because they're not trying to make sense. What they're trying to do is produce closure, which then somehow makes a human being, who is living in the light of closure, a more manipulateable, a more malleable, a lesser thing.

So if the experience of the Twentieth Century didn't do it for you, if psychedelics didn't do it for you, I don't know what could do it for you! The message coming back at all of us is: live without closure. That's the honest position, given that you are some kind of a talking monkey, some kind of a primate, some kind of creature, on a planet, in an animal body, incarnate in a time and space. In the face of that, life without closure is the only kind of intellectual honesty there is.
- McKenna speaking at the Wetlands Preserve, NYC
July 28, 1998

Great Love,
John

[elirien]

Originally Posted by Reveling John

I suppose this is simply a matter of difference in opinion since we have not experienced the society where a genuine attempt to use money simply as a means of resource representation and management was made. Maybe a fair and just society that uses money as it's transactional medium is possible. I don't think that money or currency is bad, anymore than religioun is bad. I'm trying to emphasise the observation that in our history and in our current situation the economic market has been used as tool for control, oppression and the preservation of ignorance. Is that the only way which it can be applied to our society? No, I don't think so. Is it inherently designed for that purpose? Yes, I believe so.

I understand that you have choosen not to put this polar judgement on money and I respect that and feel as well that the judgment is not helpful. At the same I would really like everyone to get into the habit of asking themselves, "Why money?" Money can be a dirge to humankind or an enhancement, and it has certainly been both of those things, but so few people ever get the chance to ask the simple question, "Is money necessary?"

Is money necessary?

There it is actually That was my whole point and I knew that we were talking about the same thing just from different perspectives. Is money necessary? Well of course not. But, and this is a big but it is far too early to "dump" it. It is still necessary because of the ethical, physical and also spiritual implications. Which are not addressed in Zeitgeist Addendum. To get rid off money is the last step which we as a species and a collective unconscious are far far far away to achieve right now. It's like saying "I think I can fly" and jumping off a cliff rather then learning the process either by levitation through meditation or researching the proper technology that will open the way.

Originally Posted by Reveling John

I feel you clearly and resoundingly. Maybe a text compilation of many of this forum's topics would be a useful resource, so yeah, that's an awesome idea. On that matter of reaching a "conclusion" I prefer to side with Terrence McKenna:



Great Love,
John

Exactly my sentiments again. There is this quote from mckenna that i like very much: "Culture is an operating system" I expressed myself wrongly in the previous post. It shouldn't be conclusion but beginning for a new experience/work to be had/done.

Well we are actually half done here on the text part. If TranceAM and the others have nothing to add I will make a pdf out of the posts relevant to the topic to spread around. I will wait until Monday. Perhaps there are still details to discuss on the subject.

Thank you John and every other person in here. This has been an interesting and beautiful experience.

[Seva]

Originally Posted by able

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...ist+-+Addendum

and

http://zeitgeistmovie.com/

Great post

[Ashatav]

I found This Video So Good that I Must to put it here:


The THEOSOPHIC NEW AGE connection part 1


The THEOSOPHIC NEW AGE connection part 2


Cheers!