Page By Category
Blogs - Theo J - The Zeitgeist Movement: Where Does the Fraudulence Truly Lie?
Author: Theo J (Show other entries)
Date: Dec 05, 2010 at 03:22
(Originally written April 12th, 2010)
My focus for this article is the followers of The Zeitgeist Movement and their leader (if you like), Peter Joseph. I used to be an avid conspiracy theorist, but while I am still sceptical of the major political parties, capitalism and the media etc. I don't hold that the arguments of the Zeitgeist films are accurate.
I am actually a supporter of the Venus Project and so it may seem strange to some that I am against its so-called 'activist arm'. The Zeitgeist Movement at its core is a conspiracy theory movement. The majority of followers believe the claims Peter Joseph makes. I want conspiracy theorists reading this to consider three relevant questions:
Question 1 (see Muerto's excellent article for more detail)
Peter Joseph claims that he gives no weight to 'credentialism' as people with credentials have merely gone through pre-approved processes, jumping through academic hoops. [1] I am trained in history and since most conspiracy theories are historically-based it is important to evaluate this assertion.
Peter Joseph isn't talking from an informed perspective and is, of course, speculating. He wrongly assumes that experts think inside the box, but as 'Muerto' has shown, there's actually little incentive for that. Personally, I can vouch for the fact that the higher you go up through the education system for history (and presumably other subjects) the more independent you become. In fact, it's actually hard to get into the higher mark boundaries at university level and onwards unless your work is original.
When Alex Jones pointed out that Peter Joseph made mistakes in the first part of 'Zeitgeist: The Movie' he replied 'I do my research as best as I can'. [2] But while he may denounce experts you'd think he would be able to at least know some basic historical techniques for research. I can only presume that Joseph doesn't know the difference between primary and secondary sources. He hasn't looked beyond some dubious secondary sources. If he did his research as well as possible he would have looked for the primary sources available. This is, in general, one of the biggest problems with conspiracy theories- its reliance on secondary sources. When sources are used at all that is.
He points out how great thinkers have excelled outside the 'establishment'. Yes, but those people challenged the establishment, they didn't dismiss it. Conspiracy theorists practically never show how scholars are wrong, just how they're 'right' (not that it's demonstrated with frequent referencing to sources...)
Question 2
The second question is an important one. So many conspiracy theorists are inflexible in the way they think and refuse to consider alternatives to their beliefs. This seems ridiculous since they call people who disagree with them sheep. These people I describe as 'sheep switching sides'. The fact that I investigated the claims for my self put me in a tiny minority of conspiracy theorists.
Indeed conspiracy theorists often have religious levels of conviction. It's dangerous to claim certainty on these kinds of issues, but since it is so fanatical in nature, it seems to reflect a psychological rather than a rational certainty. Maybe their beliefs reflect their psychological states?
Professor Chris French and Dr Patrick Leman's research [3] has found that you are more likely to believe in conspiracy theories if:
a) You have low levels of trust.
b) You are alienated from society.
c) You are prone to assumption
Interestingly, I believed in the Zeitgeist films when I was depressed and the friend who recommended the film, who used to believe in David Icke's theories, told me that since he got a girlfriend, became more popular at school and so on- he stopped believing those ideas entirely.
Zeitgeist and Money
Peter Joseph has made out like debunkers are motivated purely by profit. [4] However, he is profiting from the sale of Zeitgeist DVDs and T-shirts. He claims that he has generously chosen to sell the DVDs for $5 instead of $20. However, in total that would probably mean making less money. He states: 'The DVD sales (and T-shirts I add parenthetically) are obviously a part of my income. I denote that that they're not for profit meaning that the money does go into other projects which it has'.
Based on what he says there, it's pretty clear it's for both profit and projects. How much for each is not clear. Those 'projects' by the way are basically just a few publicising ventures. It can't be that costly.
'Activism'
Joseph acknowledges that for things to keep going money is needed. Yet there is no mention or encouragement for people to donate money to charities, or links between certain charities and The Zeitgeist Movement. When you look at it objectively you see that the movement is actually about as 'activist' as a sloth- it's barely even encouraging activism. How much work has been done alongside charities who are actually committed to tackling the world's horrendous injustices? Hitherto, all the projects have been based on publicising the movement. Not one is aimed at directly solving a specific problem.
Conclusion
Few of the followers of The Zeitgeist Movement have been sceptics regarding what they've seen in the films. The movement is based on false pretences. I've always considered myself outside the political, educational systems etc. but the system you should also take on and challenge constantly is your belief system.
I really hope The Zeitgeist Movement get off their arses soon. I think things like preventable and unnecessary poverty and famine are tragic realities but Peter Joseph and most of his followers have simply furthered their identities and profits based on those injustices. Wearing a T-shirt isn't going to bring about seismic change.
If you want to really help then take action, help a charity out or a positive cause of your own. If you're too busy give some money to charity. As yet at least, The Zeitgeist Movement and most its followers have shown no such interest.
[1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tw9IHJNB75E
[2] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=My9MMMcoF2g&feature=related
[3] http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3082712932054125675# 34:11- 45:30
[4] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tw9IHJNB75E
My focus for this article is the followers of The Zeitgeist Movement and their leader (if you like), Peter Joseph. I used to be an avid conspiracy theorist, but while I am still sceptical of the major political parties, capitalism and the media etc. I don't hold that the arguments of the Zeitgeist films are accurate.
I am actually a supporter of the Venus Project and so it may seem strange to some that I am against its so-called 'activist arm'. The Zeitgeist Movement at its core is a conspiracy theory movement. The majority of followers believe the claims Peter Joseph makes. I want conspiracy theorists reading this to consider three relevant questions:
- Why do no respected scholars or experts endorse the views of conspiracy theories?
- Why is it easy to find an abundance of debunking articles against conspiracy theories but virtually impossible to find any which debunk said articles?
- Why, as the case may be, are you so unprepared to challenge your beliefs?
Question 1 (see Muerto's excellent article for more detail)
Peter Joseph claims that he gives no weight to 'credentialism' as people with credentials have merely gone through pre-approved processes, jumping through academic hoops. [1] I am trained in history and since most conspiracy theories are historically-based it is important to evaluate this assertion.
Peter Joseph isn't talking from an informed perspective and is, of course, speculating. He wrongly assumes that experts think inside the box, but as 'Muerto' has shown, there's actually little incentive for that. Personally, I can vouch for the fact that the higher you go up through the education system for history (and presumably other subjects) the more independent you become. In fact, it's actually hard to get into the higher mark boundaries at university level and onwards unless your work is original.
When Alex Jones pointed out that Peter Joseph made mistakes in the first part of 'Zeitgeist: The Movie' he replied 'I do my research as best as I can'. [2] But while he may denounce experts you'd think he would be able to at least know some basic historical techniques for research. I can only presume that Joseph doesn't know the difference between primary and secondary sources. He hasn't looked beyond some dubious secondary sources. If he did his research as well as possible he would have looked for the primary sources available. This is, in general, one of the biggest problems with conspiracy theories- its reliance on secondary sources. When sources are used at all that is.
He points out how great thinkers have excelled outside the 'establishment'. Yes, but those people challenged the establishment, they didn't dismiss it. Conspiracy theorists practically never show how scholars are wrong, just how they're 'right' (not that it's demonstrated with frequent referencing to sources...)
Question 2
The second question is an important one. So many conspiracy theorists are inflexible in the way they think and refuse to consider alternatives to their beliefs. This seems ridiculous since they call people who disagree with them sheep. These people I describe as 'sheep switching sides'. The fact that I investigated the claims for my self put me in a tiny minority of conspiracy theorists.
Indeed conspiracy theorists often have religious levels of conviction. It's dangerous to claim certainty on these kinds of issues, but since it is so fanatical in nature, it seems to reflect a psychological rather than a rational certainty. Maybe their beliefs reflect their psychological states?
Professor Chris French and Dr Patrick Leman's research [3] has found that you are more likely to believe in conspiracy theories if:
a) You have low levels of trust.
b) You are alienated from society.
c) You are prone to assumption
Interestingly, I believed in the Zeitgeist films when I was depressed and the friend who recommended the film, who used to believe in David Icke's theories, told me that since he got a girlfriend, became more popular at school and so on- he stopped believing those ideas entirely.
Zeitgeist and Money
Peter Joseph has made out like debunkers are motivated purely by profit. [4] However, he is profiting from the sale of Zeitgeist DVDs and T-shirts. He claims that he has generously chosen to sell the DVDs for $5 instead of $20. However, in total that would probably mean making less money. He states: 'The DVD sales (and T-shirts I add parenthetically) are obviously a part of my income. I denote that that they're not for profit meaning that the money does go into other projects which it has'.
Based on what he says there, it's pretty clear it's for both profit and projects. How much for each is not clear. Those 'projects' by the way are basically just a few publicising ventures. It can't be that costly.
'Activism'
Joseph acknowledges that for things to keep going money is needed. Yet there is no mention or encouragement for people to donate money to charities, or links between certain charities and The Zeitgeist Movement. When you look at it objectively you see that the movement is actually about as 'activist' as a sloth- it's barely even encouraging activism. How much work has been done alongside charities who are actually committed to tackling the world's horrendous injustices? Hitherto, all the projects have been based on publicising the movement. Not one is aimed at directly solving a specific problem.
Conclusion
Few of the followers of The Zeitgeist Movement have been sceptics regarding what they've seen in the films. The movement is based on false pretences. I've always considered myself outside the political, educational systems etc. but the system you should also take on and challenge constantly is your belief system.
I really hope The Zeitgeist Movement get off their arses soon. I think things like preventable and unnecessary poverty and famine are tragic realities but Peter Joseph and most of his followers have simply furthered their identities and profits based on those injustices. Wearing a T-shirt isn't going to bring about seismic change.
If you want to really help then take action, help a charity out or a positive cause of your own. If you're too busy give some money to charity. As yet at least, The Zeitgeist Movement and most its followers have shown no such interest.
[1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tw9IHJNB75E
[2] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=My9MMMcoF2g&feature=related
[3] http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3082712932054125675# 34:11- 45:30
[4] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tw9IHJNB75E