Add a Review

  • krebssebastien1 January 2009
    Everyone should watch this movie. Everyone. That's the point of the movie. Share it. Everyone must know what's going on. And on the difference from the 1st one, this one doesn't try to make you think we leave in a conspiracy, this one explains you what kind of conspiracy we are all in at the moment. The money-conspiracy. And no one can tell they are wrong, because they just explain the system we live in, with simple words. And it makes it much easier for anyone to understand it. This gives anger and hate against the system but also hope and motivation. If everyone sees it, maybe we got a chance to change something.
  • This movie really opened up my eyes as to how we are trapped in a system that will inevitably fail. The only reason I haven't spent more of my spare time fighting it has been that I didn't know how to make the world function in a different way.

    Ever since I was a little kid I have always believed that a) People should work together on agreed goals instead of competing with one another, and that b) Every necessity of life should be handed out to every single person - clean water, food, clothes, shelter, health care, education, electricity and means of traveling the Earth. Without anything demanded from them in return. When that is taken care of, luxury items can be produced out of whatever is left of the Earths resources and bought by those who choose/volunteer to educate themselves and work despite having all they really need at hand for free. Then I saw this movie, and got hooked on its ideas!
  • This film is possibly an astonishing eye opener for many people. For others who know the truth already, or at least know the corruption that is rife among the people with power, this film supplies even more substance. It is not completely infallible, but it doesn't claim to be so. It simply provides factual information, that we the 'sheep' - a good few billion of us, shouldn't be allowed to know. Everyone should see this film & decide for themselves whether what is being portrayed is in fact the way forward or a load of baloney. I personally think it is something worth delving more deeply into, that is my opinion only. By the way, for those people who suggest that to be led by this type of film shows naivety or stupidity or both, open your eyes. Even if this film isn't entirely correct, its honest & its very interesting & more so its worth watching. Watch & decide for yourself, Im 100% with it.
  • EdgarST7 July 2011
    For someone who comes from a country (Panama) that has also contributed to US comfort with its resources for decades (as this film states... and yes, it's true), this is the first time in my life that I've heard (and seen) someone admit that Gen. Omar Torrijos was killed by the CIA. Back in 1981 I had read the so-called "Santa Fe Document" (which I believe was a report created for Ronald Reagan, who had already been chosen as the next US president by the plutocrats, a text that also gave "solutions", as killing leaders, attracting talents via scholarships, or overthrowing governments), so I was not much surprised whenever a Latin American leader died. They were being killed like flies. I remember quite vividly the day Torrijos died, and how I thought, "They did it!" So this documentary was very revealing in that sense, and touching indeed. It does give enough information for one to make personal conclusions, based on what we already knew (in case one reads alternative info, instead of listening to news from CNN, Fox, etc.), with Jacque Fresco adding a funny dimension, John Perkins playing the prodigal "s.o.b", and J. Krishnamurti as the prototypical guru (even when he claims that there are no gurus, but our own reasoning). The documentary adheres to a movement, and that is its main short coming, but in the end that is what inspired the previous exposition. One may believe or not on the Venus Project, but that does not matter: what lies beneath, the reasoning behind many of its proposals are true more often than not. Cynic rejection without further analysis, without admitting that in the end what we do is to protect our little privileges, will not last forever. Recommended.
  • Its good to see both 'Zeitgeist' and 'Zeitgeist Addendum' getting good reviews on IMDb which is a lot more than can be said for wikipedia. The only reviews it shows are journalistic slants by people who generally just refuse the information upon first viewing. My opinion is these people are so caught up in their 'psychological conditioniong', they find it difficult to comprehend so much information which totally rejects what they are used to reading and seeing in the commercial news daily. And they often use language which is difficult for the normal person to understand. Its complete intellectual materialism. These people may boast thorough university educations, but there's no way you can absorb all the information in 'ZI' and 'ZII' in one viewing. It requires multiple viewings, which are extermely rewarding.

    Having studied film at university, I personally think Zeitgeist and Zeitgeist Addendum are more important than any other form of media ever produced. By that I mean any film or television show created. Peter Joseph is a Messiah of the 21st Century as he has clearly spent a lot of his own personal time to spread the real message of truth to the people. He doesn't do it for profit or reward, but simply to inform the people. Kudos
  • This masterpiece, although it hasn't mentioned nearly enough about the motivation of money & it's effects on people beside the idea that money is the same as debt, offers us so much information to "what's really going on", that when you see it the 1st time, it will probably blow your mind. After you get passed the fact that you are astonished by the information that is given to you on a silver platter, you will begin to give a lot of credit to Joseph Peter, and I for one really believe in such a future as the one mentioned in the "Venus Project". I am 20 years old of age and I started college approximately 1 year ago. The reason I'm mentioning my age & the fact that I'm in college is because this documentary made me feel proud of myself for not choosing to go to a Military/Police Academy, respectively, because of this documentary I am now even more proud that I didn't choose to study Economics or Politics, and that I decided on studying Electronics Engineering. Technology is the wave of the future & money is the root of all evil things for that matter, basically this is what Zeitgeist Addendum is all about. Technology can provide, money is just a front, a means of oppression. The sooner everybody will find this out, the better for our future generations, that is if money won't mean the end of everything... This documentary, in my opinion, also focuses on "hope for a better future". I'm really happy to know that there are people out there who really believe in a brighter tomorrow, in a world like the "Venus Project", where routine jobs will be extinct & where most importantly I quote a phrase from the Zeitgeist: "no one will be left behind". Kinda brings tears to your eyes when you think about how things are & how things should be... doesn't it.
  • Voxel-Ux13 December 2008
    Warning: Spoilers
    This film was created, edited, directed, scored, etc., by Peter Joseph.

    The subject matter centres on the redundancy of the present American system of government, money, democracy and cultural conditioning and uses this as a basis to explain all that is wrong with the United States and World Power in general. A lengthy and detailed effort is made to support these views and the views of like-minded individuals interviewed for this presentation. It also offers another way of viewing how the world could be and, in reality, could exist on a more successful level that would be less harmful and more beneficial for all humanity. Even rare film footage of the great Krishnamurti making a speech on how to free one's self from the tyranny of oppression is used both in the beginning and the end of the film to support this ideology.

    A most convincing argument indeed to present to those steadfast in the belief that the present anachronistic system is either a successful one, or indeed the only one available to a very troubled world in which we are slaves to a powerful few bent on profit and not humanity. Technology is suggested as the most important external tangible means of cultural survival and fulfillment by describing the ideals put forward by The Venus Project and pulls no punches in straining to get across the benefits and logic of switching to this more mature and sane outlook.

    The film is well researched and intelligently put together and most intriguing to watch. It also offers a practical way to 'do one's bit' in order to invest in the transformation for those convinced by the arguments presented. The only drawback would lie in creating suspicion in some people who may be put off by the concluding speech which asks to join the project to make a change as this may have a 'cult-like' connotation.

    Nonetheless, it certainly made me think...
  • Great movie, very motivating. In the end, however, has some hope for the human race. It is up to us to take it. This movie is a good guideline .... I believe that as Jacque Fresco said there is no perfect system or a perfect society but definitely a lot better than this today. Alternative energy solutions are the perfect start. It is not difficult is not complicated it is easily applicable. Peter Joseph has made a great job with this film and i do not see him as the Messiah because of some ideas in the film, but as the Muse definitely yes. Of course, most ideas are not original, nor his, but the movie as the sum of quality ideas about improving the human race on the planet that inhabits.

    "there are no teachers, no priest, no guru, no students, followers, etc". JK
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Everyone should watch this movie. In all countries the law is to protect the shareholders of BIG companies, the political elite and the rich few. It was an eyeopener for me and also for my friends thats seen it. It shows the American way. in its real lights. Paranoia. Words like top secret, classified, need to know basis, and so on, are used too often and only for the benefit of the big business, and corrupt leaders. Maybe there will be some change with the new president, but I doubt it, and I think it will "same same but different", as usual. The leaders of yesterday has left too many unanswered questions. As said "Watch & decide for yourself".

    Ill be waiting for the next movie, if and when it comes.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    First of all I want to make up for some false information provided by other reviewers by making two things absolutely clear: - the movie is not an advert for anything. there is no book to buy. believe it or not, the so called "book" is a PDF File available on www.thezeitgeistmovement.com and is absolutely free, just as are the Zeitgeist Movies.

    • Zeitgeist Addendum never suggests that technology replacing human labour (automation) would be a bad thing, the movie only points out that businesses use this progress to save costs and therefore increase profit. Remember: Revenues - (minus) Costs = Profit (roughly).


    (I have no intention of reviewing it, it is not a movie like another, its purpose is not to entertain or to transpose messages through known cinematic patters.The movie is free, meant to be spread and the messages in it are clear, there are no metaphors, comparisons or anything alike) To the point then of my movie comment:

    This movie clearly intents to reshape the thinking process of intelligent human beings. Instead of absorbing the education and the values we are given as real, trustworthy and natural, and then merely registering them we should start to question the education, question the values of society, doubt them, check on them and only then decide if information is trustworthy or not; reject what is in doubt until there is absolute certainty about the trustworthiness.

    In my opinion this movie should also be questioned, doubted. This is exactly why I said that the movie is for intelligent people; after watching this movie they change their thinking process and immediately start to doubt the monetary system but also the movie and the Venus Project.

    It takes intelligent people to understand what this movie wants and about what it is and it is crucial to understand first. With watching the movie, the job is still not done, one should start researching on their own with any tools given if things are really that bad in and with the monetary system. We need to ask ourselves a thing or two: were the obvious long term consequences of the monetary system intended? Is the Venus Project socially possible? Haven't we gone too far already? There is no correct answer to such questions, the answers are arbitrary, the solutions are created by everyone. This tears us apart.

    I personally find the Venus Project very appealing but I see many problems already.

    First of all, it is very idealistic since the values we're given from the monetary system are so strongly inherent in our nature. Could you possibly imagine a world without money? Doing work to live on a good standard that everyone has. Maybe so. Maybe not.

    There would be no competition then, would there? The technologies presented in the movie to harvest clean energy from natural inexhaustible sources are brilliant but I don't think for any second that the one who comes up with it would not ask for money. For profit. To distinguish himself from the others. to compete.

    This leads me to the second point: the Venus Project asks us to lay down competition. However, isn't it competition and the thrive for profit that makes us evolute? Are newer and better Computers really produced to make us evolute, or is evolution just a side effect of the rush for profit? The latter I would say.

    It is competition that makes some of us study in the best universities, to get better jobs, to earn more money and the side effect might really be some evolution. I don't think humanity and its instinctual nature would ever be ready to work to evolute instead to compete. As long as the human being is instinctively driven by competition, there will never be a Venus Project.

    Reason on the highest scale and depth is what could bring the Venus Project to life: refusing to compete, refusing to get profits at any cost, refusing a strong elite position; refusing to value money.

    We would need to value life. Compassion. Solidarity. Impossible? No.

    But it needs time and work, some processing, too. The human mind needs to be reshaped, education needs to change, societal values need dramatic change as well. Just as the movie points out, tradition values need to be flushed away but this cannot happen over days or years.

    I am sure that it will be reality someday. I am also sure that this process of changing values will take a lot of time, I'm thinking about hundreds of years; or when we run out of oil. We need to be forced to changed, preferably by nature.

    Until that happens, a world where there is no money, no unemployment, no competition, no differentiation between a Ferrari and a Ford, and technology for everybody, such a world will remain a kids fantasy. I had that fantasy, too, this "idea".

    But what would be a world where everybody has everything for nothing? It would be a world where the new values are love, family, fun. Which raises new competition (who gets the better family, the prettier wife/husband...)... right now, as intelligent as I might be I say: We live in a vicious circle of competition. Money is not the problem, competition is. As a conclusion I think that a world without competition would free us all, and yet leave us with nothing. I hope that hundreds of years after me there will be a near perfect world.

    Probably without us, we are not made for such a world.

    Thanks if you read this to the end :-)
  • Warning: Spoilers
    This film is well worth watching, it exposes the Capitalist system for it's inherent greed and corruption, and then provides a new aim for the world putting humanity first, as a united species.

    Some have said this film contradicts itself for first saying that automation leads to concentrated wealth, but is also our salvation. this is not a contradiction, however, since no-one is claiming that automation is wrong, only that capitalism is. For under capitalism the ownership and use of machines leads to unemployment and so the concentration of wealth. And yet under the system proposed, the machines could be used to free humanity from menial tasks to the benefit of everyone.

    I watched this film before I saw the original, and I must say the original is terrible in comparison. Please do not let the original stop you form watching this masterpiece. Keep an open mind, and enjoy the film.
  • The First Zeitgeist was an amazing movie that I gave 10/10 despite being a practising and proud Christian. Joseph tackles very taboo topics such as Sept.11th and the U.S agenda of world domination. Because of this fact the film was attacked and all the factual flaws exposed.

    In Zeitgiest Addendum Joseph used a better fact checker because the movie is so tight, it's impeccably done.

    Joseph delves into the financial system, but this time stays away from theories, and just deals with facts...and the facts alone are scary. We learn that the financial system is basically a pyramid scheme that has taken place over the last 100 years and it is about to crash, no bail out will save them.

    What's good about this film is that it offers a solution...the Venus Project....and a Resource based economy, this system of society is beyond Utopia, beyond communism, a technologically advanced society where the survival of humanity is the inspiration. Money is abolished back to the stones age where it came from.

    This would be a beautiful place to live, I'd love to see this happen in my children's lifetime...even if it was one city. We have so much more potential as human beings, than working on a shipping doc, to buy cigarettes, so some fat cat can eat lobster....in the new world we will be exploring space, and knowledge will be far more valuable that money.

    Like the first, this movie is free...please search for it on line and enjoy.
  • bgar-809326 June 2017
    It had a lot of interesting things in the documentary and if you bothered you could go look it up to see what's true and what's not because there are both but that's where the good ends. I don't think the documentary knew what the hell it wanted to talk about half the time and the flow was terrible. Also, it's super biased. I really liked the first one because it just told something. It never really gave an opinion although it clearly had one. At least I don't remember the opinion being stated quite the same. From what I call the first one brought up problems with out society as it relates to religion, government, and banking in 3 parts and never got all jumbled like this one. I don't know how this has like the same score as the first.
  • For weeks I was pestered by my friend Alexander to see this documentary.. I was quite bored (to be honest) within the first two parts and discontinued watching. After seeing Zeitgeist: The Movie (the first), I reconsidered watching Addendum. The film is brilliantly produced and captures the attention of all peace-loving individuals. It is my firm belief that The Zeitgeist Movement is a movement all people of all nations ought to look into and this movie helps answer questions that many are too afraid to ask. As for the Venus Project, Jacque Fresco is nothing short of a genius. Having lived from early 20th century America to now, he's got the clearest vision of a direction the entire world should be headed into.
  • This is the obvious follow up to the 3rd part of the first film. It is just as eye opening but at one point in the film the decision to involve the concepts of "The Venus Project" is a bad decision. The problem is that there are some major issues with The Venus Project that are very short sighted.

    I have studied the concept in immense detail using a specific ability I has to see eventuality using probability algorithms. It fails in enough areas to invalidate it. There definitely needs to be an intermediary step before any utopian based project is implemented.

    I applaud Peter Joseph for caring but he needs to study the concept in much more detail before deciding to piggyback his cause with The Venus Project.
  • There were too many mistakes and (il)logical jumps in the first movie that it deservedly was attacked by critical thinkers worldwide. This one is not without it's flaws either, but it is less dogmatic, there are more interviews and the message you get out of it is a clearer one.

    The movie is divided into four parts: Part 1 deals with the current monetary system and it's flaws. In my opinion it presents things in an oversimplified manner and occasionally grossly misinterprets socio-economic principles. Still, it is interesting food for thought. 2/5

    Part 2 continues from the first part with an interview with John Perkins, in which he reflects on his role as a self-described economic hit-man. Again, not so challenging. More scare-mongering than substance. 2/5

    Part 3 introduces The Venus Project, a proposal created by Jacque Fresco for a sustainable future. This is a lot more interesting and thought-provoking although a lot of it's principles appear rather weak upon closer examination. Regardless of that, the issues that are raised are very real and the message is that they should be thought about and something should be done about them fast. 4/5

    Part 4 examines the emergent and symbiotic aspects of natural law and what it means for humans. Again, quite an interesting treatment of an important subject. 5/5
  • The 'economic hit man' was indeed insightful and on the face of it highly informative and obviously designed to get people interested. The film I thought descended into too much of an evangelical downturn toward a childish idealism for my liking. For me this brought into question the 'hitmans' credibility as he rather joined in the preaching toward the end. The guy at the Venus project highlighted a theoretical, theological solution without ever outlining any hint of a realistic implementation and unfortunately intimated that the ultimate goal was a one world, one nation, peaceful global existence. However nice that sounded it bore a remarkable resemblance to the Rothschild guys vision of a single world government which was vilified, for good reason, earlier in the films. Had the bank made a movie the latter would certainly have appeared the more desirable. The first movie was more interesting but should serve only to provide a stimulus for further research into history and the reasons behind its most important events. For example how did day to day life go on in the years between the formation of the Federal reserve bank and the abolition of its predecessor years earlier Where you then find your truths you will almost certainly question your education (certainly of the 20th century as much of these type of conflicts went on through the ages) and will hopefully furnish you with a better understanding of the world. That, coupled with further reading and an innate understanding of human nature, may help us educate further generations out of what I suspect are some truths within this very interesting and topical pair of films.
  • This film is basically an indictment of all types of governments and economies which have ever existed on the planet. The film is centered around the ideas of the earnest Jacque Fresco, who thinks technology will free all humans from competition with each other, will allow us to do away with monetary societies, dictatorships, socialism, and replace these with a resource based economies.

    If you accept Fresco's thinking that there is no such think as innate human behavior, ie: that literally everything we do is culturally dictated (the blank slate theory), then you might be susceptible to his impassioned line of hogwash. That is, if you aren't very well read, and are about 16 yrs. old.

    But anyone who has even the slightest knowledge of evolutionary biology and child development knows there is a HUGE biological component to human behavior. Like all animals, we are hardwired for certain behavior patterns, although our specific environments do indeed work upon our genetic endowments.

    I would expect most 12-yr. old school children in developed nations have enough common sense to realize the fallacy of Fresco's argument; if everything we do is shaped by our environment, how did our impoverishing monetary-based slavery system even evolve in the first place? The answer is, economic and governmental systems evolved and continue to better themselves organically, in the most efficient ways possible, according to how intellectually advanced the people in a given country/region have become.

    In Fresco's utopian world, there are no lazy people, no criminals, and no need for police. He thinks by doing away with the evil U.S. monetary system, and creating technology to replace the jobs of 90% of the population (his figure), people would be so relieved and happy that peace on earth and good-will toward men would rule the day.

    The problem Fresco doesn't answer is: who the hell is making all those machines which will give 90% of us a life of leisure? Who is running the show, and what on earth would prevent those leaders from allowing absolute power to corrupt them absolutely? Oh yeah...human nature is infinitely malleable, according to Fresco. But...WHO is doing the molding? Apparently Mr. Fresco is. What would that make him...a Technology Tzar of the universe?

    A silly film, all said and done, and palatable only to dreamers who would deny human nature. Social engineering hasn't worked in the past anywhere in the world. America isn't perfect, but our levels of economic and political freedom provide the highest standard of living human beings have ever experienced in the history of mankind.

    I just hope our socialistic president hasn't led us down the same path to ruin which Europe is currently on. Long live free markets! Down with the utopian social engineers who know better than we do what is good for us.
  • kaapoff12 January 2010
    Warning: Spoilers
    This movie is really worthless. The creators have changed or used the quotes in all the false meanings. The simple thing that FED doesn't create money and that there are different types of debts makes this movie a conspiration theory with purpose of generating money for the creators. If you are patient and want to explore the false thesis used in this movie, just read a little on internet. Seriously, do you really think that all the educated bankers are CORRUPTED and ignorant? That everyman who knows how the system works is egoist? This movie tries to generalize economic theories, but it is impossible. As impossible as explaining the complete functions of a car in two sentences. This is science, guys! This scince have existed for centuries and definitely improved during the latest decades. Come on, people, be critical! Create your own point of view! This movie is just as bad as the first part.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    !Warning, some spoilers contained!

    I didn't really care for this documentary because it's format is not very academic. Jacque Fresco seeks to educate and inform, but his method is not very professional. He simply asserts an idea as truth, and then moves on the next idea, to build his case against the practice of fractional-reserve banking. I don't entirely disagree with all of his ideas (I would even support banking reform based off of this documentary), I just wish he would go about it in a more professional and academic method.

    The foundation for the modern form of education, debate, and critical viewing of ideas goes back to Socrates, Plato, and earlier philosophers. One of the most important maxims that has evolved is the idea of "citing your sources." I have watched Zeitgeist and Zeitgest Addendum and Mr. Jacque Fresco is terrible at citing sources. If I lived in 1200 A.D./C.E. and someone simply stated the world was round, it would be really easy to dismiss them. If someone told me that they had done research, and based on their calculations, which were based on the calculations of other respected mathematicians that they believed the world was round, it would be a lot harder to dismiss.. That's because now I'm not just dismissing the idea, I'm dismissing the persons work, their research, other respected mathematicians, and quite possibly scientific thought up until this point. That's a much larger hurdle than just dismissing a statement. Mr. Fresco's ideas are fairly easy to dismiss because he doesn't cite his sources well. Mr. Fresco does occasionally use references to academic journals, magazines, quotes, and even cites a court case, but he uses them as they suit his argument, sometimes out of context, and ignores evidence that doesn't concur. For example, he uses the First National Bank of Montgomery v. Jerome Daly case to highlight that making money out of thin air is illegal and unconstitutional. He fails to highlight that the court case was later nullified by a higher court. That's a pretty important aspect for someone who is going to use that as evidence for building an argument, but it's inconvenient so he fails to mention it.

    Mr. Fresco's ideas are definitely intriguing and cause pause for thought, but they just do not hold up to the bombardment of critical thinking.
  • I found this documentary truly excellent. I've seen all the other reviews on here saying how "eye-opening" it was. I agree to a large extent. It is very educational on how fundamentally flawed and ridiculous our monetary system is. Its hard to believe some of the stuff about perpetual debt but it does make sense, as shown by the worldwide economic collapse in recent years, and how nothing seems to have changed even after this. What this film does is explain how the current worldwide economy is unsustainable, unjust and horribly corrupt. I think people know there is poverty and suffering all over the planet, but assume that eventually there will be peace and happiness and abundance. Why? If we sit idly by and don't change anything, we will continue towards oblivion until all our resources are gone and everyone nukes the s*@!out of each other. War is such a futile exercise. This film made me realize that unless you actually get up of your couch and stop supporting the huge corporations, and stop believing the propaganda that is spoon fed to us, then millions will suffer in the third world for eternity and society as a whole will be held back immensely so the elite don't lose their status. Watch this.
  • This movie is absolutely fantastic and I have to recommend another one that should be watched after this one.

    There are many great revealing documentaries about the problems of humankind, most of them blame the monetary system, corporations etc. A film called Kymatica says money is just a symbol that we've created and explains a different view on the root cause of our problems. It delves into human nature and why we do the things we do in the first place. The film has the most eye opening brilliant explanation to our issues that I've ever heard in my entire life. To say I was amazed by this film is an understatement.

    I would say watching both Zeitgeist Addendum and Kymatica will give you the best overview and understanding of things anyone can possibly have in a short period of time.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    The general idea of the movie is good and some ideas in particular are well developed:
    • the imperialism and the 'corporatocracy' (thanks John Perkins).
    • the world financial system.
    • the relation between the US State and the FED.


    However, I find many issues:

    1) There are some naive, false (and even dangerous) ideas like:
    • 'Politicians are all corrupt'.
    • 'Politicians are useless'.
    • 'True problems in life are technical, not political'.
    • 'Reject the political system'.
    Why I say this? Because this 'bad' political system gave birth some pro-people-politicians (not pro-imperialism) like Jacobo Árbenz, Jaime Roldós, Omar Torrijos, Saddam Husein and Hugo Chávez... I mean, come on... EVEN THIS MOVIE shows them. If they were 'useless', then why most of them were killed? Certainly not because they were 'useless'. They weren't pro-imperialism, that's why. If 'true problems in life are technical, not political', then (again) then why most of them were killed? The answer is the same: because they were pro-people, not pro-imperialism. That's why. Put it together, please! One thing or another... but not both at the same time!

    Furthermore, if 'there is a group of people who run the world who does not allow people to take the power', then there is no point of doing anything at all... I mean, why would you try to do something if there is someone above you who doesn't allow to implement your idea? For many time, Árbenz in Guatemala proved that statement false... such as Roldós in Ecuador... such as Torrijos in Panamá... such as Hussein in Iraq... such as Chávez in Venezuela...

    "The Venus Project" appears to be interesting, but how would it be implemented dispense with both politics and politicians?

    2) Seems like we, the people, are all stupid and, hence, guilty for our ignorance... So, the blame is on the people? Really? Let me give you an advice: if you want to change people's behavior, you get nothing by calling them 'stupids' or things like that. It's not really effective...

    3) The 'no State' final objective (developed in 'The Venus Project' proposal: 'the State does nothing becasue there's no State') is very similar from the Rumsfeld-Cebrowski strategy... That coincidence must ring any bells.
  • As an overwhelming response to the critical and massive success of Zeitgeist many scholars and like minded thinkers showed interest in Peter Joseph's documentary.

    For Director Peter the idea of part two emerged after intense dialogue and interactions and interviews with many people. Peter added stories and experiences of John Perkins and Jacque Fresco and deliberated solutions as to what one can do to support his movement.

    The documentary is divided into four sections

    1) How federal reserves prints money (out of thin air - just like that they print new currency) on request of the Federal banks, who roll over 90% of currency as loans by taking security deposit from those who takes loans. Thus they always maintain 100% funds with them, even after giving away 90% as loans. They receive repayments of loans with interest. So basically bank multiplies its own wealth. The loser are debtors who are taking loans from this banks and pay high interest rates.

    2) Narrated by John Perkins on how USA works to control other countries by lending countries money through World Bank, IMF etc. and when a country is in debt - they negotiate exploitation of natural resources. If the country does not cooperate with USA, through CIA US government organize a civil war within a country or assassinates the leader through plane-crash or accident. The examples are given of several Latin American countries and Iraq (Sadam Husain did not cooperate)- to exploit their oil reserves; and Afghanistan (Taliban did not cooperate) - to exploit their poppy cultivation (90% of world)

    3) Deals with Jacques Fresco - who believes that there can not be democracy under capitalist system. He presents the scenario of technological innovation providing better life to people than Politicians who only serve corporations and make the people work like slaves under them.

    4) The last section presents solutions and action points - like don't believe in mainstream media news (controlled by corporations), Boycott Banks, don't join military and support Zeitgeist movement.

    Compared to part one, the part two is less impressive.

    The scenarios of Federal Bank rotating and multiplying paper (so called money) by fooling people is interesting. John Perkins take on how USA overthrows governments - too makes an interesting viewing - as this could have happened scenario. Jacques Fresco's thoughts on future seemed too scattered and half baked - was not convincing for me.

    The solutions and action points were too one-directional and hard to implement on a large scale among world population.

    I felt that there was more enthusiasm to immediately come out with Part 2 and provide some feasible solutions to the world.

    Since this documentary is of 2008, one can comfortably say that nothing much has changed since then. Rich countries / individuals are becoming more richer and poor are becoming poorer.

    One can see this documentary once, just to know some interesting details of first two sections.

    I will go with 5.5 out of 10
  • Warning: Spoilers
    I think this movie is a must watch, yet keep in mind that topics covered in it are subject to active debate and this movie only depicts some of the hypotheses and for the sake of the story many other ideas are not even mentioned! In particular are the topics on the genetics and economics. The problem is very well explained yet the solution that is given at the end is unrealistic I think! The program traces back all the problems to the early theories of Adam Smith in 1700s. The scene at the end with the pile of trash money is so radical I would say! The fact that they try to distant themselves from socialism is a bit annoying. Socialism of Sovient Union didn't work! This doesn't mean that socialism, meaning equality and egalite is a taboo to talk about!
An error has occured. Please try again.