The Venus Project

My name is URL

I've been interested in the Zeitgeist Movement for a couple of years now, and one of its sister projects is called Venus..

it's pretty much an idealistic vision of tomorrow's society dreamt up by a man call Jacque Fresco

You've probably heard of the 'Your Country, Your Call' initiative set up by Martin McAleese.. at the minute a proposal to implement some of the ideas from the Venus Project has the most support on that site, by a long way

What do you think? Is this workable or is it just a Utopian pipe dream for people disconnected from the real world?

PirateShampoo

Its all fun and games until someone asks you to drink from a bath full of Kool-Aid.

Cheap Thrills!

My attention span is short.

Looked at the website and no answers as to what its all about within the essential first 10 seconds.

Seems like they require me to read something.....

Can you sum it up in 20 words for the attention-span challenged please and thankyou.

DonkeyStyle \o/

Cheap Thrills! wrote: »

Can you sum it up in 20 words for the attention-span challenged please and thankyou.

Communist hippy circle-jerk with robots that do everything for us. Free everything for everybody. Hooray.

Jesus Wept

My name is URL wrote:

at the minute a proposal to implement some of the ideas from the Venus Project has the most support on that site, by a long way

Having read the first two lines, it sounds like communism.

MagicMarker

Venus and anus sound alike.

Jesus Wept

Women are from anus.

My name is URL

The-Rigger wrote: »

Having read the first two lines, it sounds like communism.

It is a bit like communism, but it's only ideas.. What are the alternatives? It's about what happens well down the line from now, not today or tomorrow

Do you think the way we live now will be sustainable in the future? The ideas have to start somewhere =p

Jesus Wept

I just think it's an awful and unworkable idea.

I have no idea why they assume that if it were implemented there would be no crime and no need for prisons or lawyers.

Only nutritious and healthy food would be available

Sounds pretty controlling.

Biggins

Gene Roddenberry was thinking along the right lines of a possible, achievable utopia.
His vision buried in amid superfluous tv plots and weekly episodes, was one that we should all strive towards.

Jesus Wept

the holodeck

Biggins

The-Rigger wrote: »

the holodeck

Now don't be silly!

Women with 3 bobbies! :cool:

The_Minister

Biggins wrote: »

Gene Roddenberry was thinking along the right lines of a possible, achievable utopia.
His vision buried in amid superfluous tv plots and weekly episodes, was one that we should all strive towards.

His vision was shown as being unachievable throughout DS-9 IMO.

His society sounds great until you realise that it relies on people doing **** jobs for free, and currency keeps popping in and out of existance depending of whether or not it's needed for the story.

It's just not realistic.

DonkeyStyle \o/

Aye, the Grand Negus would be spinning in his grave... soo many rules of acquisition being broken.

Biggins

The_Minister wrote: »

His vision was shown as being unachievable throughout DS-9 IMO.

His society sounds great until you realise that it relies on people doing **** jobs for free, and currency keeps popping in and out of existence depending of whether or not it's needed for the story.

It's just not realistic.

I agree in what some of you say but maybe the "free" work, was the volunteer work?
Currency or barter systems will always be a part of society but according to Gene and many others before and after, it should be of secondary basis for interaction and peaceful co-existence, not a primary one (that subsequently seems to cause more division and wars than any other method besides religion)

mikom

Men are from Mars, women are from Venus, but we're not sure about Gaga, because she has a penis.

Biggins

mikom wrote: »

Men are from Mars, women are from Venus, but we're not sure about Gaga, because she has a penis.

That must be Xenu at work!
The scientologists were right! :eek:

The_Minister

Biggins wrote: »

I agree in what some of you say but maybe the "free" work, was the volunteer work?
Currency or barter systems will always be a part of society but according to Gene and many others before and after, it should be of secondary basis for interaction and peaceful co-existence, not a primary one (that subsequently seems to cause more division and wars than any other method besides religion)

Lets take an example from DS-9.

Sisko's Dad owned a restaurant.
People waitressed in his restaurant.
He cooked in his restaurant.
People delivered food to his restaurant.

All for free.

That would not happen.

The thing is, most humans will work together on a small scale to do what needs to be done, and help others out.
What they won't do is work to help others and get nothing but thanks back, for longer than a small period of time.
Why would anyone waitress or run a restaurant for free?
Why would people grow food (and there was none of that replicated muck in his establishment) and do all that work for free.
And, even if some would, would enough do so to run society?

People need money and profit to get them out of bed when they want nothing more than to cuddle back into the blankets, they need it to motivate them when the job that needs doing sucks.

Who's going to take out the bins in that kind of society?

Biggins

The_Minister wrote: »

Lets take an example from DS-9.

Sisko's Dad owned a restaurant.
People waitressed in his restaurant.
He cooked in his restaurant.
People delivered food to his restaurant.

All for free.
That would not happen.

All very true as it looks at first appearance but getting back to my (probably wrong) point, maybe the goal of all at that level of human progression, is to firstly seek happiness in doing what makes on happy, not just in monetary gain.
Working for satisfaction, satisfaction in working and then monetary gain as an additional benefit.
That man (and woman) should be happy to adopt whatever role they find they are happy in and whatever happens, one will not starve nor go without shelter.

Nice idea I admit but hundreds of years - if ever - away.
I'd love to be proven wrong in centuries to come.

Cheap Thrills!

Thought it was supposed to be Utopia? Im not doin anythin for FREE :mad:

When do the Monkey Butlers arrive?

I am sick of making my own noodles, I'm hungry dammit.

epgc3fyqirnbsx

If you're not a Socialist before 30 you have no heart, if you're still a Socialist after 30 you have no head

It's a fantastic notion that it might work but it's just against human nature.
We're a greedy shower of hoors

Cecilia Gifted Oak

Cecilia Gifted Oak wrote: »

If you're not a Socialist before 30 you have no heart, if you're still a Socialist after 30 you have no head

It's a fantastic notion that it might work but it's just against human nature.
We're a greedy shower of hoors

Well you might say that, but you only have to look at the underbelly of Irish society where scum who we house and give money/health care to for free will happily assault/harass you for no reason.

Where do they fit into this Utopian society?

You might say they are victims of their own circumstance, but then why are so many people in the same situation grateful and nice people in general?


The Liberal Democratic society we live in is as good as we're going to get any time in the near future. All opportunity must be as equal as possible. Some will seize opportunity, some people will be happy to live in the underbelly of society because they don't give a ****. People as a whole are driven by their own personal motivations, and even if 99% of people would subscribe to this Ideal (which they wouldn't) there will always be pricks that will say "Why the **** would I work when I can just rob my neighbour's stuff"

Fago!

Biggins wrote: »

That must be Xenu at work!
The scientologists were right! :eek:

Xena the warrior princess? She must have taken a career change. What branch of Scientololy did she go to? Physics, chemistry, biology?

landsleaving

Are we colonising Venus now? Is it full of sexy alien chicks? Is it not a bit warm there?

robby^5

landsleaving wrote: »

Are we colonising Venus now? Is it full of sexy alien chicks? Is it not a bit warm there?

We can cool down in the sulfuric acid showers.

landsleaving

With the alien chicks?

AnonoBoy

Anytime anyone mentions Zeitgeist I just think of that rubbish conspiracy theory film that was out a few years ago. God awful sh*te which was all just obviously wrong so I'm afraid I cannot look at their sister project because it's probably the same level of sh*te talk.

Overheal

The-Rigger wrote: »

Women are from anus.

It all makes sense now: Men are from Arse and Women are from Anus!

/runs to write Thesis

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Eutopia, how I love you.

Mankind has gone to diverse and complex and therefore removing the posibility that a eutopia could exist.

Native American Indians had the idea, along with other native tribes around the world. Although they didn't have the problems of over population and the likes.

You know the idea of living off the land, only taking what you need and being in harmony with nature. That's my idea of eutopia, only problem is I would miss the comforts of modern living

The_Minister

Terrance Moldy Ratio wrote: »

Native American Indians had the idea, along with other native tribes around the world. Although they didn't have the problems of over population and the likes.

You know the idea of living off the land, only taking what you need and being in harmony with nature. That's my idea of eutopia, only problem is I would miss the comforts of modern living

You realise that Native Americans regularly had bloody wars over territory with each other, and one of the Canadian tribes practiced whaling?

They aren't as one with nature as people think, there were just less of them because they had a higher child mortality rate.

Zanmato

1. An OP who doesn't know what he's talking about
- The Venus Project is the project itself.
- The Zeitgeist Movement is the activist arm of which support the ideals this movement advocates, which chapters worldwide.

2. People read two lines on Wikipedia about the Zeitgeist Movement and cry ''DIRTY COMMUNIST''.

The movement is in no way affiliated with any form of religion or political party. The movement is based on pure LOGIC, free from the biases of the aforementioned.

If you could please take the time to Youtube ''Zeitgeist Addendum'' and ''Jacque Fresco'', you would be able to better substantiate an argument as to whether this is legitimate or not.

This 'futuristic' technology he speaks of is, for the most part, available today. Why don't we have it. Short answer: Money. Greed.

And it is quite possible for all this to happen. Yes, you would not have to work a day in your life if you did not want to. If you enjoy doing something, the resources are fully accessible.

I implore everyone to take a look at the video when you have two hours free.
Then fling around opinions.

King Felix

Zanmato wrote: »

1. An OP who doesn't know what he's talking about
- The Venus Project is the project itself.
- The Zeitgeist Movement is the activist arm of which support the ideals this movement advocates, which chapters worldwide.

2. People read two lines on Wikipedia about the Zeitgeist Movement and cry ''DIRTY COMMUNIST''.

The movement is in no way affiliated with any form of religion or political party. The movement is based on pure LOGIC, free from the biases of the aforementioned.

If you could please take the time to Youtube ''Zeitgeist Addendum'' and ''Jacque Fresco'', you would be able to better substantiate an argument as to whether this is legitimate or not.

This 'futuristic' technology he speaks of is, for the most part, available today. Why don't we have it. Short answer: Money. Greed.

And it is quite possible for all this to happen. Yes, you would not have to work a day in your life if you did not want to. If you enjoy doing something, the resources are fully accessible.

I implore everyone to take a look at the video when you have two hours free.
Then fling around opinions.

What are the steps from watching the video to the realisation of the Venus Project in Ireland?

Sticky_Fingers

This 'futuristic' technology he speaks of is, for the most part, available today. Why don't we have it. Short answer: Money. Greed.

Very much like the capitalist society we live in today the Venus Project has at it's heart a fatal catastrophic flaw that means that any system based on it is bound to fail much as our current on is doomed to. That flaw is the assumption that there is an inexhaustible supply of cheap readily available energy that can be tapped. Unfortunately this is not the case. If humanity had acted sooner instead of sitting on our hands smothered in fossil fuels and prioritised work on renewable energy sources decades ago perhaps there would be a chance but as it stands now we've pretty much screwed the pooch.

We have squandered our chance for the short term gain of easy living and only in the West mind, things have always been pretty sh"t in most parts of the world. As it stands we're on the precipice of a massive fall, when people finally wake up to the fact that the era of oil is over the world is going to go ape**** and things are going to get very hard for most of us. Forget the Venus project, it's a pipe dream, we got to start working on realistic and workable solutions instead of wasting resources on could've beens and Utopian fantasies.

clived2

Zanmato wrote: »

1. An OP who doesn't know what he's talking about
- The Venus Project is the project itself.
- The Zeitgeist Movement is the activist arm of which support the ideals this movement advocates, which chapters worldwide.

2. People read two lines on Wikipedia about the Zeitgeist Movement and cry ''DIRTY COMMUNIST''.

The movement is in no way affiliated with any form of religion or political party. The movement is based on pure LOGIC, free from the biases of the aforementioned.

If you could please take the time to Youtube ''Zeitgeist Addendum'' and ''Jacque Fresco'', you would be able to better substantiate an argument as to whether this is legitimate or not.

This 'futuristic' technology he speaks of is, for the most part, available today. Why don't we have it. Short answer: Money. Greed.

And it is quite possible for all this to happen. Yes, you would not have to work a day in your life if you did not want to. If you enjoy doing something, the resources are fully accessible.

I implore everyone to take a look at the video when you have two hours free.
Then fling around opinions.

I have wached all the videos,

Now I implore you to read this accurate breakdown on why the zeitgeist etc is a load of shi*e. Its is very detailed and breaks it all down very nicely.

Sorry to ruin your logic

http://conspiracyscience.com/articles/zeitgeist/part-one/

Wibbs

Zanmato wrote: »

I implore everyone to take a look at the video when you have two hours free.
Then fling around opinions.

I've watched the Zeitgeist movie(s). It is so full of holes it could be used as a fishing net. The first part is beyond risible. It actually becomes hilarious. It could only be taken as something even approaching truth by someone with little or no knowledge. The second part is on slightly(and I do mean slightly) firmer ground, but the parts original to it are not very believable and the believable parts are not very original. The third part is the usual tinfoil hattism of 911 conspiracy.

Then we get to the Addendum. Again very little original and very very little of substance. It also has many many errors and misdirections.

TBH the whole Zeitgeist lark to me sounds like something someone cooked up for a bet to see how many would fall for such levels of bullshít. In that they have won that bet and it sadly shows up how many otherwise intelligent people out there buy into this for the want of a little more knowledge of the subjects involved.

King Felix

Wibbs wrote: »

I've watched the Zeitgeist movie(s). It is so full of holes it could be used as a fishing net. The first part is beyond risible. It actually becomes hilarious. It could only be taken as something even approaching truth by someone with little or no knowledge. The second part is on slightly(and I do mean slightly) firmer ground, but the parts original to it are not very believable and the believable parts are not very original. The third part is the usual tinfoil hattism of 911 conspiracy.

Then we get to the Addendum. Again very little original and very very little of substance. It also has many many errors and misdirections.

TBH the whole Zeitgeist lark to me sounds like something someone cooked up for a bet to see how many would fall for such levels of bullshít. In that they have won that bet and it sadly shows up how many otherwise intelligent people out there buy into this for the want of a little more knowledge of the subjects involved.

What's your solution to world peace and equality, if you believe one can exist, that is.

Sticky_Fingers

King Felix wrote: »

What's your solution to world peace and equality, if you believe one can exist, that is.

You are labouring under the assumption that there is a solution. There will never be world peace, humans when you get right down to it are a savage territorial bunch who will fight and squabble over land and resources and this is only going to get much worst in the future. Sure we love our family and friends but if we're talking about some poor sod on the other side of the world we couldn't give a flying f$ck if "our boys" rained fire down on him as long as we felt it was in some way justified. The best that we can hope for is that when war breaks out it's a "just" one and that nations only responded to acts of military aggression.

As for equality, that I am afraid is never going to happen. The only way there is true equality in the world is if you again have an inexhaustible supply of energy and resources. Without this there will always be the haves and the have-nots.

I'm not saying that I like the situation or advocate the "grab all you can for yourself and screw everyone else" mentality that such a view may imply but it's the reality of the world in which we live. The human race, like everything else in this world is bound by the laws of nature and unfortunately there is no way of getting something for nothing. The best we can hope for is that people at least get what they need, though not all they want.

Wibbs

I don't think there is one. Or at least not the utopia some seek. We can make a more equitable and more peaceful world than it is though. A better spread of access to clean resources would be a start. Not easy to do though. Look at the growth of China. They're doing very well at the minute. But they're using the same model of energy creation and resource (mis)management that was the cause of much of our current woes. Quite understandably they will say "well you did it, so why can't we?". That's unsustainable though. For all their economic might, China is still for the most part playing consumerism catchup. Imagine just on one point, if the car ownership levels of China were the same as Ireland? All that oil and energy required would be crazy. Solving that will take brains way more than I have on board on my best day.

King Felix

Wibbs wrote: »

I don't think there is one. Or at least not the utopia some seek. We can make a more equitable and more peaceful world than it is though. A better spread of access to clean resources would be a start. Not easy to do though. Look at the growth of China. They're doing very well at the minute. But they're using the same model of energy creation and resource (mis)management that was the cause of much of our current woes. Quite understandably they will say "well you did it, so why can't we?". That's unsustainable though. For all their economic might, China is still for the most part playing consumerism catchup. Imagine just on one point, if the car ownership levels of China were the same as Ireland? All that oil and energy required would be crazy. Solving that will take brains way more than I have on board on my best day.

I think it was the American scientist Buckminster Fuller who proposed the Global Energy Grid ie. the linking up of all the worlds electricity grids, to make better use of the available resources. It could be co-opted to use the best available green energy resources, it would improve co-operation between nations and might prevent future conflicts, since it would be against peoples interests to disrupt the grid.

I think a lot of countries agreed to it in princple and there was a big summit organised in 1990 to look into it. Unfortunately the conference was due to take place in Kuwait and Saddam invaded.

Earthhorse

The_Minister wrote: »

Who's going to take out the bins in that kind of society?

I dunno, coastguard?

Miguel_Sanchez

Zeitgeist.

What a complete load of horse manure. Anyone who watches and believes that film needs to be sat down with a strong cup of coffee and given a good talking to.

My name is URL

Jeff_Lebowski wrote: »

Zeitgeist.

What a complete load of horse manure. Anyone who watches and believes that film needs to be sat down with a strong cup of coffee and given a good talking to.

The first one is pretty much crap. The follow up isn't quite as bad or unbelievable to be fair

King Felix

clived2 wrote: »

http://conspiracyscience.com/articles/zeitgeist/part-one/

This debunking link always comes up whenever Zeitgeist is mentioned.

Didn't an historian, Acharya S, who made a small contribution to the movie, rebut most of the Edward Winston's points, in her recent works, citing all the relevant sources etc

The author of the link 'debunking', Edward L. Winston is a software engineer, I believe.

Interesting debate.

I don't believe the points behind that part of the movie have been debunked yet, even if the movie makers did present some of them poorly.

Wibbs

King Felix wrote: »

This debunking link always comes up whenever Zeitgeist is mentioned.

Didn't an historian, Acharya S, who made a small contribution to the movie, rebut most of the Edward Winston's points, in her recent works, citing all the relevant sources etc

The author of the link 'debunking', Edward L. Winston is a software engineer, I believe.

Interesting debate.

I don't believe the points behind that part of the movie have been debunked yet, even if the movie makers did present some of them poorly.

The first part? The religion bit? That part is beyond daft. Seriously. It wouldnt survive one second of historical/theological peer review. I'd love to see a link where someone tried. It is so full of holes and historical inaccuracy it's more a work of fiction than any religion they care to namecheck. There's a part where a supposed list of other "gods" fly up the screen at high speed and its worth stopping the video to read some of them. It was at that point I thought this has to be a písstake.

King Felix

Wibbs wrote: »

The first part? The religion bit? That part is beyond daft. Seriously. It wouldnt survive one second of historical/theological peer review. I'd love to see a link where someone tried. It is so full of holes and historical inaccuracy it's more a work of fiction than any religion they care to namecheck. There's a part where a supposed list of other "gods" fly up the screen at high speed and its worth stopping the video to read some of them. It was at that point I thought this has to be a písstake.

I agree the video is daft in places.

I was talking about Acharya S' refutations of Edward Winston's debunking.

Wibbs

King Felix wrote: »

I was talking about Acharya S refutations of Edward Winston's debunking.

I thought I'd heard that name before and Google reminded me. She was the author of one of the books of the "Jesus never existed historically" kind. Very fashionable for a time in the 70's. Very very few historical scholars would agree with her. It ignited an interesting debate on the matter and certainly I would personally feel that actual facts about the subject are hard to come by, but the historicity of Jesus as a figure I would have no issue with(the God part I leave to the faithful). The problem with her and others linking of the story to other deity myths, is the simple lack of evidence. Oh sure you will read examples where other works are referenced, but they're other works of the same vein and invented. Another example of this in another area, that old saw about "women use more words in conversation than men" quoted all over the place in various books and believed by many. Problem? Well it was first referenced as a "fact" in an early men are from mars, women are from venus type book and has since been repeated from that source. It has no basis in peer reviewed science.

At times Zeitgeist becomes staggering in its stupidity. EG where the movie makes reference to and a connection with the "Sun" and the "Son". Yea great. Pity it only works in English. :rolleyes: Unsurprisingly it doesnt work in Greek, Latin or Aramaic. And they call that evidence?

The Horus myths bear little relation to the Christ myth either. His ma wasn't a virgin, there was no three kings(there weren't three kings in the gospels either, they make no mention of their numbers beyond the plural). he didnt have 12 apostles, he didnt die(he couldnt, he was a god), he wasn't crucified and didnt rise again. He also wasnt born at Christmas. Neither was Jesus BTW. The solstice isnt on Dec 25th either.

If Acharya S does "debunk the debunkers" and uses any of those above notions to do so, I would not call her much of a historian.

Terry

My name is URL wrote: »

It is a bit like communism, but it's only ideas.. What are the alternatives? It's about what happens well down the line from now, not today or tomorrow

Do you think the way we live now will be sustainable in the future? The ideas have to start somewhere =p

Human greed and lust for power/control will always prevail.

The only solution is...

King Felix wrote: »

What's your solution to world peace and equality, if you believe one can exist, that is.

Replicators.

King Felix

Wibbs wrote: »

The problem with her and others linking of the story to other deity myths, is the simple lack of evidence. Oh sure you will read examples where other works are referenced, but they're other works of the same vein and invented.

From a review of one of her books, which is endorsed by some other historians...

[FONT=Verdana, Sans-Serif]Destined to be a classic enjoyed by both the professional scholar and the layperson, this comparative religion book contains a startling perspective of the extraordinary history of the Egyptian religion and its profound influence upon the later Christian faith. Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection by D.M. Murdock, also known as "Acharya S," uses a massive amount of primary sources and the works of highly credentialed authorities in relevant fields to demonstrate that the popular gods Horus and Jesus possessed many characteristics and attributes in common.[/FONT]

It's hard to know which 'expert' to believe.

At times Zeitgeist becomes staggering in its stupidity. EG where the movie makes reference to and a connection with the "Sun" and the "Son". Yea great. Pity it only works in English. :rolleyes: Unsurprisingly it doesnt work in Greek, Latin or Aramaic. And they call that evidence?

I already agreed, the movie is daft in places.

The Horus myths bear little relation to the Christ myth either. His ma wasn't a virgin, there was no three kings(there weren't three kings in the gospels either, they make no mention of their numbers beyond the plural). he didnt have 12 apostles, he didnt die(he couldnt, he was a god), he wasn't crucified and didnt rise again. He also wasnt born at Christmas. Neither was Jesus BTW. The solstice isnt on Dec 25th either.

If Acharya S does "debunk the debunkers" and uses any of those above notions to do so, I would not call her much of a historian.

Wibbs

King Felix wrote: »

From a review of one of her books, which is endorsed by some other historians...

Links by any chance? That seems a bit selective in its review to say the least. You will find many many more scholars would be hard pressed to stifle a chuckle at most of her output on this subject.

It's hard to know which 'expert' to believe.

Yes and no. Im all for skeptical looks at such things, the problem is the "evidence" is so thin that Bob Geldof would organise a concert around it.

I already agreed, the movie is daft in places.

Oh no I saw that. The thing is stuff like that, the truly embarrassing obvious stuff is but part of it. There is barely a line in the first part that is historically, culturally or theologically backed up or correct. Like I said the Horus connection alone doesnt bear much scrutiny. Ask any egyptologist. If you did want to make a connection with Christian(and Jewish) monoatheism then the Armana period of Egyptian history would prove far more compelling.

King Felix

Wibbs wrote: »

Links by any chance? That seems a bit selective in its review to say the least. You will find many many more scholars would be hard pressed to stifle a chuckle at most of her output on this subject.

It says it in any of the reviews for the book, Amazon etc.

Of course not having read the book, I don't know which points her 'primary sources' refer to.

This book was only published in 2009 so I'm not getting much on google about the historical inaccuracies in it. I'll keep digging.

Yes and no. Im all for skeptical looks at such things, the problem is the "evidence" is so thin that Bob Geldof would organise a concert around it.

:pac:

I'm just taking my own skeptical look at the debate.I noticed that debunking link that's always rolled out was compiled by a software engineer, so I did start to wonder.

If you did want to make a connection with Christian(and Jewish) monoatheism then the Armana period of Egyptian history would prove far more compelling.

K.

ScumLord

I like the ideas of the Venus project and Zeitgeist I think we should seriously take some of them on board definitely move towards a more rational and scientific based society but over all I don't see it working.

The reason it won't work is because it's boring and it doesn't take into account that people are just common animals, we can't be treated like entries in a database. I'd like to see some sort of two tiered system where the state guarantees a minimum standard of life that we all contribute too and then a economical playground to push development.

While I'd like to see us move in the direction of the Venus project especially when it comes to getting people to take care of themselves and their surroundings, I don't like the centralised focus of modern society, it devalues people.