“Zeitgeist and Marxism” article.
- This topic has 13 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 9 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I did a cut and paste of this article and posted it as a subject on the new global Zeitgeist forum. It has had one reply from someone who has quoted a passage from the TZM "Orientation Guide" which I think might be the work of Peter Joseph…
They're discussing it here too:http://www.facebook.com/groups/147039565328926/
I think some SPGBers should answer some of the ignorant points made here… http://thezeitgeistmovementforum.org/showthread.php?433-Socialist-Perspective-on-TZM-2012-13-Orientation-Guide-Part-1-Adam-Buick-SPGB-WSM&p=890#post890 These people clearly have no understanding about how society is organised and they know bugger all about Marx.
"Thank you Socialist guy for putting us in our box of "Communism". Now go away. You don't get it. An entire article of him trying to understand TZM by comparing it to antiquated bullshit. Man he was trying real hard to find that box! COMMUNISM?! SOCIALISM?! MARXISM?! ARRRRAHHH I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO WITH THESE GUYS MY BRAIN IS EXPLODING!"This is the latest comment from a TZM member on a thread which has been running here on the TZM global website http://thezeitgeistmovementforum.org/showthread.php?433-Socialist-Perspective-on-TZM-2012-13-Orientation-Guide-Part-1-Adam-Buick-SPGB-WSMI just find this really depressing. 5 years ago when TZM came on the scene I was thinking it would be a great opportunity for WSM and TZM to interact and create sparks. This is never going to happen is it? I think TZM are going nowhere at the moment. The initial buzz has dampened with traffic on the new TZM website about a tenth of what it was 5 years ago. They are a nebulous web based phenomena with no card carrying members. They are not organised politically, democratically or consciously.
Ozymandias wrote:I just find this really depressing. 5 years ago when TZM came on the scene I was thinking it would be a great opportunity for WSM and TZM to interact and create sparks. This is never going to happen is it? I think TZM are going nowhere at the moment. The initial buzz has dampened with traffic on the new TZM website about a tenth of what it was 5 years ago. They are a nebulous web based phenomena with no card carrying members. They are not organised politically, democratically or consciously.It is depressing but when some of us were predicting a few years back what would probably happen with TZM as with the Occupy Movement later on we were shouted down, often by fellow-members.These movements (quite often fly-by-night) have a tendency to mean all things to all people which again demonstrates how important it is to remain focussed on a single, well-defined objective with members who fully understand and are clear about that purpose.However, there are people in TZM who are very close to our ideas and we should not 'throw the babies out with the bathwater'.
Ozymandias wrote:"Thank you Socialist guy for putting us in our box of "Communism". Now go away. You don't get it. An entire article of him trying to understand TZM by comparing it to antiquated bullshit. Man he was trying real hard to find that box! COMMUNISM?! SOCIALISM?! MARXISM?! ARRRRAHHH I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO WITH THESE GUYS MY BRAIN IS EXPLODING!"This is the latest comment from a TZM member on a thread which has been running here on the TZM global website http://thezeitgeistmovementforum.org/showthread.php?433-Socialist-Perspective-on-TZM-2012-13-Orientation-Guide-Part-1-Adam-Buick-SPGB-WSMI just find this really depressing. 5 years ago when TZM came on the scene I was thinking it would be a great opportunity for WSM and TZM to interact and create sparks. This is never going to happen is it? I think TZM are going nowhere at the moment. The initial buzz has dampened with traffic on the new TZM website about a tenth of what it was 5 years ago. They are a nebulous web based phenomena with no card carrying members. They are not organised politically, democratically or consciously.To be fair the guy who posted that has 3 posts and his location is "the freest and most prosperous country on earth". Probably not representative of TZM.That said I completely agree with Gnome although I hope we're wrong and TZM goes on to prosper and grow.
Whatever you think of the Zeitgeist Movement, you've got to give it to Peter Joseph — he's a good communicator, as in this recent interview:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhZSxeiziMgFor most of the time he's saying much the same as us, about capitalism, abundance, society being out of sync with technology, the need to organise rationally and scientifically production for needs not profit or finance. Ok, we can fault him on some of the "transitional" measures he touches on here and his claim that current unemployment is "entirely" technological (a wild exaggeration), but then he's not a member of the World Socialist Movement. When you listen to him, you can get the impression he's been reading some of our stuff.
Someone has posted a link to this "libertarian socialist" critique of the Zeitgeist Movement on our facebook page:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3SZT7MZop44It's not bad but is direct democracy the complete answer of the technocratic tendency Zeitgeist is criticised for? Is there nothing in between, e.g. delegate democracy with majority decision-making (as well as leaving some qualified technicians to get on with the job)?
The book TZM defined is free downloadable here http://www.thezeitgeistmovement.com/uploads/upload/file/19/The_Zeitgeist_Movement_Defined_6_by_9.pdf I have on skimmed read it so i may be doing it an injustice. “TZM’s advocated benchmark for decision-making is not a Moral Philosophy, which, when examined at its root, is essentially what Marxist philosophy was a manifestation of. TZM is not interested in the poetic, subjective and arbitrary notions of “a fair society”, ”guaranteed freedom”, “world peace”, or “making a better world” simply because it sounds “right”, “humane” or “good”. Without a technical framework that has a direct physical referent to such terms, such moral relativism serves little to no long-term purpose.” But the section on Marx in the economics chapter is passable. But the content of crisis chapter is very contentious. “The reality is that all money comes into existence through loans and each of those loans is made with interest attached, where the loan must be paid back with the interest fee accrued (bank’s profit); meaning that the very nature of money creation automatically entails a negative balance by default. There is always more debt in existence than there is money in circulation….all money today is made out of debt and this debt-money is sold into the market as a commodity through “loans”, with the mark-up of interest attached to generate a profit for the banks. Yet, this “interest” profit, which is money itself, is not created in the money supply itself. For instance, if an individual takes out a loan for 100 dollars and pays 5% interest on the loan, that individual is required to pay back 105 dollars. But, in an economy where all money comes into existence through loans, which is the reality, only the “principal” ($100) exists in the money supply with the “interest income” ($5) uncreated. ….Contrary to popular belief, most loans are not given from a bank’s existing deposits. They are invented in real time, limited only by a set percentage of their existing deposits.453 In short, due to this process over time, it is currently possible that for every $10,000 deposited, about $90,000 can be created from it through the process of ongoing loans and deposits across the entire banking system.” Their solutions are offered in scenarios1. A systematic move from the market economy to a NLRBE could theoretically occur through a step by step” socialization” of the core attributes of the societal infrastructure. Essentially, we dismantle one layer while implementing a new one in the most fluid way we can. This term “socialization”, which is of course a stigmatized notion in the West given the hyper-glorification of the market economy and the demonization of anything otherwise, is still technically appropriate to use in this context, bias aside. This simply means that the necessity of money and the market mechanism would no longer apply to the given social attribute (not that a traditionally “socialist”, in the political and economic sense of the word, structure would replace it). Direct, advanced technical means would produce and distribute without a price tag, meeting these needs directly. 2. “global social movement tactics become critical to put pressure on the existing system, along with helping change the intents and values of the culture itself by vast education and communication projects. transitional activism. The goal here is to not only facilitate a move to the new model, but to also work to help those suffering in the current model, basically bringing them in first in this process of transition. This is done by creating parallel systems, which do not use money but still provide helpful services to people. ” — On this i think they argue muchg the same as Robin Cox has — A mutual credit system is a form of barter for services or goods, which allow non-monetary exchange values to be applied to other goods and services, removing the 1:1 good to good correlation common to simple barter. LETS is an example. It assists an interest free, non-inflationary form of exchange where value cannot float or fluctuate, as it does today, among many other positives. In the case of the “time bank”, it is based on the prior work of the person, in effect. There are a number of variations of these kinds of systems and they are becoming ever more sophisticated in their programming and malleability. Another tactic, which has a similar effect, is the use of community sharing systems….”—also proposed is Stuart Watkins Guaranteed Basic Income —- It is called a “guaranteed” or “unconditional income” system. This simply means people are given basic life-supporting funds each year to meet basic needs, with no one left behind….” The book also discusses the TZM in one country possibility arguing for autarky , stopping all trade with foreign countries and becomin 100% sustainable inspiring other countries to follow suit. But plenty of source material to digest and regurgitate in our own articles. Plenty of practicable prposals on planning, implementation and allocation.
Apologies for the lack of paragraphs – you all know now the reason is with the website not my lack of concern or consideration.
alanjjohnstone wrote:Apologies for the lack of paragraphs – you all know now the reason is with the website not my lack of concern or consideration.I'm sure it's not your lack of concern or consideration, but it's not the fault of the website ! How to start a paragraph is not all that hard to master. How to do it has been explained here a number of times, I think.
Ozymandias wrote:I read some of this TZM book. Pretentious wordy jargonese?You're right. It is filled with too much scientific-sounding jargon which must be counter-productive as it only re-inforces their technocratic image. What they are trying to say can be explained in much simpler language. As we do.
I don't think PJ is a good communicator. I would say the opposite is true. He would put your average worker off. It's bad enough trying to convince workers of the SPGB case which is argued in straightforward language never mind the TZM jargon juggernaut. I began to watch a TZM video lecture entitled "Economic Calculation in a Natural Law" which was recorded in Berlin presumably intended to tie in with the release of their new guidebook. I stuck it for about 15 minutes and switched off the minute he started talking about "Structural Classism". Pretentious pish. The problem is TZM are so terrified of being lumped in with the left that they will do anything to avoid being branded "Socialist" and as a result they throw the baby out with the bath water by inventing an entirely new lexicon of techno psychobabble gobbledygook mixed with faux intellectualism. Peter Joseph revels in it because he thinks he's a genius and he likes the sound of his own voice. He wants a mention in the history books. And the result for TZM in the past 5 years? Nothing but atrophy. What fucks me off is that self important little pricks like Frederico Pistono are talking their shite and getting lecture gigs all over the world whilst the very finest thinkers, debaters and public speakers languish in utter obscurity within the WSM. It's a fuckin joke man.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.