Error
  • Error loading component: com_weblinks, 1

I have heard some people state that they think force is necessary to bring an RBE because not everyone will want it. Force means you are oppressing someone and you have to do so because they don’t share their value set. The RBE model TZM is pitching is VOLUNTARY. Why? Because if people choose it, they are supporting sustainable values that are pre-designed into the system. It is a given that some people will opt for something else and that’s fine. It takes critical mass to begin a transition but critical mass is not 100% approval. Fresco has stated it would likely require only 10% to start.

Here is a summation of what history’s violent revolutions brought: same shit, different people in charge. If you don’t understand the need for a value shift in order to have and MAINTAIN an RBE, then you still have some research to do. There is a method to the (seeming) madness. If you build and RBE and force people into it, what will you get? A revolution (likely violent) of people fighting to return to what they feel comfortable with: an unsustainable exchange model because that’s what people are conditioned to want (culturally speaking) until they come to the realization of its futility. TZM exists to build the desire that will create the transition of people who share a 'sustainable' value set.

J. Fresco on violence: http://youtu.be/EqtlEsJkXG0

And http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KXgHqp2juQ#t=7m00s

The Zeitgeist Movement is a non-violent movement advocating passive resistance. TZM is about EVOLUTION via awareness education. That’s the point. It’s not a political movement to bring new people to power. No “revolution” to-date has brought us sustainable design, or a system without that doesn’t require exploitation of people. Revolutions are about an US versus THEM orientation where two groups view one another as enemies and that’s not our game. So, these are how I define my terms when I say same shit, different people. We’ve modeled the movement after the highly effective approaches of the likes of Martin Luther King, Jr and Gandhi. If this is news to you, then there’s no time like the present to get your facts straight. And yes, both were assassinated. But not every supporter of these was assassinated, which is why you have change today. So, if you are a fan of effective social change reflected in history, you would be familiar with these passive resistance efforts, as well.

TZM is not about fighting a group of people or any specific person- which is why you won’t find a position supporting that. TZM is distinctively NOT an ‘US versus THEM’ movement but rather a movement advocating a model for a better world for US (and US includes the elite- yeah, it’s for those folks, too). It’s about actively changing a system that is outdated because we have the information on what can accomplish a better life, we just need people to understand it and desire it. Forcing someone to do something brings resentment, not understanding and using such force is an example of the very exploitation an RBE seeks to eliminate by design. The end goal cannot justify the forceful means while simultaneously negating the very educational message required to make the change in the first place. Oh, and participation in the movement is also voluntary.

I’m relaying the information supported and documented by TZM as defining the movement. Yes, I am a supporter of The Zeitgeist Movement and no, it’s not the only thing that will bring an RBE, it’s just addressing the most necessary thing to create and maintain it: value shift.

‎Critical mass will create the social pressure that is necessary, not force. This is all over our materials. Also, again: passive resistance is a non-victim position, though I understand that’s difficult to comprehend when we have been conditioned to think otherwise. Non-compliance is a non-victim position. Resisting capture can be a non-violent position. Group action to confiscate your oppressors weapons is a non-violent strategy. Thwarting violent actions of your oppressor by intercepting their communication or disrupting their transportation: non-violent strategies, as is detaining your oppressor in a humane way, preventing their violent actions. Lot’s of room for creativity there. It’s a far different position to advocate than: here comes the rapist, bend over and certainly nothing to suggest stargazing instead of taking necessary actions for survival.