critique of ‘Zeitgeist: Addendum’


Richard Moore


I finally found time to see this new Zeitgeist all the way through. Parts I and II are very well done, and very much worth watching. They ‘tell it like it is’ about politics, and corruption, and the money system. Lots of people are getting out the word about these things, but the Zeitgeist folks have a very effective way of communicating. They are making a valuable contribution. Particularly important are the appearances by John Perkins, where he presents all the main themes from his landmark book, Economic Hit Man.
Parts III and IV however, were kind of a turn-off for me. As with so many ‘voices’, the quality of the social critique is much more evolved than are the ideas about solutions. This is not surprising, because the problems are increasingly obvious, and for solutions we all need to be looking outside the box. And ‘outside the box’ is an inherently unknown realm, a realm where only our imaginations and intuition can guide us. 
The impression I get is that the Zeitgeist folks have only begun thinking about ‘what we can do’, and they happened to stumble on Jacque Fresco, of the Venus Project, who is interview friendly, and quite ready to give ‘all the answers’. Wanting to come up with a Zeitgeist sequel, with a ‘what to do’ section, Fresco’s vortex would have been a tempting one to fall into. And Fresco does dominate Parts III and IV. I find his ideas too mechanistic, and devoid of social or political insight. He is entranced by the same science-fiction utopia visioning that has brought us to our current state of affairs. It is not supersonic mag-lev trains that are going to make our life better.
There are some good ideas, and good scenes, in Parts II and III, but the main themes are quite inferior to the earlier critique. I was particularly impressed by the few scenes of Krishnamurti that made the cut. I wasn’t ready for him in the sixties, when I could see him live on TV. I appreciated what he had to say much more now.