Rhyolite Entertainment presents
'A Search for Solutions'
In an era of global economic strife
controlled by a small group of dominant men
with psychopathic disregard for the masses
it is crucial for us all to be aware of the problems
and even more important, is for us to discover
and implement sustainable solutions.
An Interview with Matt Berkowitz with Zeitgeist Vancouver
My name is a Matt Berkowitz.
I'm one of the coordinators of Zeitgeist Vancouver
the Vancouver Chapter of the global Zeitgeist Movement
which now has chapters in nearly 100 countries
and over a thousand cities worldwide.
I first became interested or aware of The Zeitgeist Movement
after discovering Zeitgeist Addendum online
It's the second film in the series
and the message really resonated with me.
I felt quite alienated from the values in modern society
from the acquisitive, materialistic values that many people uphold
and as such had sort of found solace in underground music
and I very much related with many of the values
that are advocated by The Zeitgeist Movement.
I went to work right away for the next several months
researching everything addressed in both Zeitgeist films
trying to get my hands on everything I could
and it became very clear to me right away
that the direction that The Zeitgeist Movement proposes
in terms of a Resource-Based Economy
was critically important information.
I knew I needed to get involved in the Vancouver Chapter.
We had our first event here in Vancouver in March 2009.
We had a screening of Zeitgeist Addendum.
That was for our Z-Day event, and a couple of months after that
we had our first activism event
in terms of actually spreading awareness to new people.
We'd setup for one of the local festivals here in Vancouver
and from then we've been active on a weekly basis
spreading this information to new people as well as giving lectures
to people who want more information.
That's pretty much how I got involved.
- How do you see the current global economic condition
the destruction of the environment for profit gain
unequal distribution of wealth, unemployment, job loss
not to mention government services, rising healthcare costs?
- Yes, all of these things: war, poverty, unemployment
income inequality, all of these things can really be traced back
to the governing social paradigm.
It's important to focus on these issues but it's even more important
to trace them back from where they originate
and that's where the socio-economic system
that essentially governs the entire world comes into play.
To borrow from Dr. John McMurtry, he says
"We live in an anti-economic system."
Essentially what that means is:
It's basically inverse to what 'economize' actually means.
If you look at the definition of that, it means
to preserve our resources in the most diligent manner
with the most reduction of waste that's absolutely possible.
Our system today does pretty much the exact opposite of that
with consumption at the heart of it.
Consumption drives everything, the faster the better for the GDP
and for the profits of all the companies within that economy.
All these problems: war, poverty, environmental decline
these are just symptomatic of the goal of trying to consume
as much as we possibly can. The competitive framework
governs our entire economic system
where companies have to adhere to cost efficiency
rather than a technical efficiency.
So immediately, all products that are created
are inherently inferior by design
because of the need to adhere to this cost efficiency
which is in order to increase your profitability
and to increase your market share.
You can't have both cost efficiency
and technical efficiency together.
They're simply inverse.
If we were to talk about a system that was actually economizing
it would be one that would be designed from the ground up
to take into account what the Earth can actually support
to reduce consumption as much as possible
basically to manage our resources on this planet
in the most sustainable manner possible.
That would be a true economy and we can get to that more later.
- From what you're saying about, this it sounds like a monetary economy
has effects on all aspects of our lives including how we're governed.
Do you think the monetary economy has any results
as far as democracy is concerned?
- Well, it's paradoxical
to have those two things together.
First of all there's never really been a democracy
anywhere in the entire world.
How can you have democracy when you have unequal purchasing power
when you have monetary interest influencing government
legislation, political parties
and basically everything that happens in the economic system?
Democracy is essentially just mob rule.
It's 51% of the population controlling
or taking away the rights of the other 49%.
In a monetary system it's impossible to have a democracy
and if you want to get into an economic system that actually works
meaning it provides the basic human needs to all people
the democratic method for social decision-making
isn't really the way to go.
It doesn't matter how much the majority of the public believes
that they can dance on the ceiling, gravity will not allow them.
We need to adhere to what we actually know in the physical world
to gain our understandings for how we should conduct social operations.
- Do you see a collapse
of the present economic system in the near future?
- It's virtually inevitable
unless the game of monopoly that we currently play is halted.
There are several key trends that we can look towards
to understand what the future of this economic system might hold.
We've got the obvious discrepancy
of living in a system of infinite growth
while we live on a planet with finite resources.
This is obviously a mathematical incompatibility.
You can't just have an economic system that grows forever
when you have a finite amount of resources.
You've got this obvious unsustainable aspect
inherent in any type of monetary or market system that requires growth.
What we really need is a steady-state economic system
and again, we can get into that.
Another attribute we need to look at it is technological unemployment.
That's simply the displacement of human labor
through machine automation , and this is happening
at increasingly faster rates than ever before in history
and that's basically the reason
for the unemployment throughout history.
A hundred years ago, most people worked in manufacturing or agriculture.
Now pretty much everyone works in the service sector
and now the service sector is even being automated
so where's the next sector to absorb all these jobs lost?
There really isn't one and the increased unemployment
we're seeing globally in the past few years is the result
of this machine automation.
There's much statistical background to support this
and if you understand the logic of this system
these jobs really can't come back.
It's just going to get more and more pronounced.
There's no sector to absorb these jobs.
The jobs are simply not coming back
and that means that the public has less purchasing power.
Less purchasing power means less ability
to support the consumption levels needed to increase GDP
and this translates into a failing monetary system.
It means the end of the monetary system as we know it.
Another attribute we need to look at is depleting oil reserves
or the phenomenon known as 'peak oil.'
We can speculate for a while how much there is left.
The obvious reality is that oil is a non-renewable energy resource
and it's not going to last forever.
It's probably only going to last a few more decades at most
and there's really nothing that we can see in this society
in terms of a concerted effort to move or to shift
the global energy infrastructure into something sustainable.
We have the technology to do it
but I believe there was an International Energy Agency study
a few years ago that found it would take 30 years and $20 trillion
to convert the global energy infrastructure into something sustainable.
Do you really think that's going to happen in a monetary system?
We have the technical capability to do it. We could do it very fast
but again the monetary system will not allow it
because of its need to maintain cost-efficiency
for all companies to make a profit in what they do.
If it's not profitable, it's simply not going to be done.
We've got peak oil
and then we've got the skyrocketing debt collapses
that's happening all over the world which is, of course, just a fiction
and can be stopped at any time, but the consequences are very real.
I think the global uprising that's happened the last several years
is largely the result of these debt pressures
that are imposing austerity measures
in many countries all over the world.
You see protests happening all over the world and in the Middle East.
We see the sovereign debt defaults of many countries in Europe
and probably only a matter of time
before the US follows eventually.
You take all of these trends and put them together
and you really see that this system doesn't have much longer.
It's completely unsustainable on almost every level imaginable
and the question I really have is
not will it collapse, but when will it
or will people wake up in time
to realize that this system doesn't work
and just put a halt to it before it does completely collapse
and destroy the planet or the species?
- There are those who would say these problems are self-perpetuated
brought on by consumers who overstress their lifestyles
and demand entitlements.
What would you say to these people?
- I would just say that that's propaganda
imposed or basically spewed out by the status quo.
Things like planned obsolescence, people who defend the market system
will say that it's consumer-driven.
This goes against the inherent logic
of the entire system of having to adhere to cost efficiency.
Every corporation has to do this
and they'll cut costs wherever they can
which automatically means inferior products
which automatically means they're going to design products
to break down, so this is just an attribute of the system.
When people say it's all consumer-driven
that basically ignores the entire mechanics
of how this system really works.
- There are those who would also say
that there's no solution for today's problems.
The recent movement by the Occupy Wall Street group
and the Occupy Together group
made their positions clear by addressing the problems
but they stopped short to address the solution.
Won't these problems that they've been addressing
be addressed with legal changes and regulations?
- It seems that there are more people who are trying to pose solutions
from within the current political or social or economic framework
and this fails to take into account
where these problems actually originate from
which is the economic system itself.
If we don't go deeper to the lowest common denominator
of where these problems actually originate
nothing is going to change it.
Legislation or regulatory efforts
do nothing to address the root causes
of where these problems originate.
It's simply a form of patchwork
and when it really comes down to it
every law in the books is just more proof
that this social system is insufficient
in terms of actually providing for everyone on this planet.
The more regulation you need just shows
that this system, again, is a failure.
People who say that this system will just work it out
by going back to the free market
that again fails to take into account the mechanisms
of how this system operates.
We need to look towards the very system itself
understand the mechanics within it
and understand that it's the structure itself
that causes a propensity for war
that causes this income inequality.
This monetary market system obviously creates this.
For example, income inequality:
the more money you have, the easier it is to make more money.
If you have a million dollars and you put it into a bank
at 5% interest per year
you get $50,000 per year for doing absolutely nothing.
[If] a lower or middle-income person
wants to get a mortgage for a house
he or she would have to go to the bank
and get a loan and pay interest.
You're essentially taking this money
from the poor and giving it to the rich.
It's basically a built-in classism
right in the very mechanics of the system.
- Some defenders of capitalism
say we've gotten away from a free-market economy
that what we have is crony capitalism or corporatism
and that returning to a truly laissez-faire, free-market capitalism
would fix the problem.
- Yes, this is one of my favorite ones to address.
It really just reveals the indoctrination that these people have
towards supporting this structure.
Advocating such a position fails to take into account
the obvious incentive for corruption within any type of market system
whether it's completely laissez-faire
or even further left-leaning.
You'd still have this incentive for corruption.
You'd still have a propensity for war.
If a country doesn't have the resources it needs
and it's not going to get along economically with them
they'll invade the country for resources.
Every war has been about resources in one form or another.
To simply return to the free market
doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
If we were to reset the free market back to
how it was in the late 19th century in the US
don't you think it would just be a matter of time before
what we have today happens?
Remember, in a market system everything is for sale
and that includes politicians, the governments, legislation.
All of these things can be influenced by corporate interest
unless we have laws against that
but then that's not a totally free market, now is it?
To simply return to a free market
is to ignore the mechanisms in that free market
that allow it to be corrupted.
Even Adam Smith understood that a purely laissez-faire economy
would turn into
a conspiracy of business interests to overtake consumers
and he never really advocated such a thing.
There are schools like the Austrian School of Economics
that almost dogmatically preach
that the free market will take care of everything
and this so-called 'Invisible Hand'
will somehow work out for the benefit of everyone.
This is completely unfounded
and when we get more into what a Resource-Based Economy is
it'll become even more clear how this system fails
to simply meet the needs of everyone on the planet
and really optimize our social functionality.
- You know, the Resource-Based Economy does sound interesting.
Can you tell me a little bit about that please?
- Yes, a Resource Based Economy
was proposed by Jacque Fresco of The Venus Project.
He's a 95-year-old industrial designer and social engineer.
Basically this economic model
transcends our understandings of capitalism, socialism, communism
transcends the entire monetary market system.
What it does is provide goods and services
to everyone on the planet without the need for money
or any type of medium of exchange:
no barter, credits, debt, nothing like this.
The realization is: We have enough food
to feed the world's population many times over.
We've got renewable energies that can last us thousands of years.
We've got incredible technologies
that could raise the standard of living of everyone on Earth
to beyond what we can even imagine today.
The only thing stopping us is our current economic system
that will really only operate
on endeavors that are profitable.
We're saying in a Resource-Based Economy, we simply do it
if we have the resources
and if it actually optimizes the collective humanity basically.
A Resource-Based Economy
essentially would provide an access abundance
to everyone on Earth because we have the technology to do this.
It would look at what's the most efficient
and therefore sustainable way
of managing resources on a global scale
taking into consideration the most efficient distribution systems
production systems and the best ways to manage our resources.
This could be summarized as the application
of the scientific method for social and environmental concern
on a global scale.
When compared to the methods of our current political system
it really is unparalleled
and that's another attribute:
We want to dissolve the current political system
and replace it with a scientific system for decision-making.
We don't want to elect people to make decisions for us.
We want to engage in statistical analysis, scientific research
to arrive at the best decisions.
The scientific method is the best method we've developed
for properly approximating what reality is
and as such, we need to actually apply this
on a social level rather than just in isolated pockets.
It's time that our social sphere be updated to what we actually know
in terms of science and technology
and that's a little bit about a Resource-Based Economy.
There are obviously many different attributes
and you can watch Zeitgeist Moving Forward
the third section, called Project Earth
which explains all the inner workings of this system in great detail.
- Do you think immediately transitioning into a Resource-Based Economy
from a monetary-based economy would work right away?
Aren't there aspects of human values and belief systems
such as greed, self-focus or aggression that play against such a system?
- It's definitely a good point. I use the analogy of:
{If] we took someone from the Amazon jungle
and we dropped them into the middle of an urban, North American city
they simply would not understand how to operate
and their conditioning would be completely obtuse.
It's basically the same.
If you took someone from our monetary system today
and you drop them into the future in a Resource-Based Economy
without orienting them to the new social system
their conditioning would be obtuse to the extent that
they would simply not understand how to operate and they...
It probably just wouldn't work
to the extent that they'd have to be educated into this new system.
This is probably the most critical point here that we need to look at
and that's human values.
What human values work and what human values don't?
We like to think that all values are equal
that we all have the right to our own belief systems
and that we're entitled an amount of respect for all of these beliefs.
Does that really make any sense, if you know...
If your value is to hold a gun to my head and tell me I deserve to die
am I supposed to respect that value of yours?
Obviously, values are not equal
and in order to understand what values work
we need to weigh them against natural phenomenon
see what sort of relevance they actually have in the natural world.
If you look at many of the values
that our social system today creates and reinforces
like all the consumptive ones, from materialism
vanity, ego and jealousy
and all these acquisitive values, they're simply unsustainable.
Those values will not lead to social betterment in any way.
They're simply there because advertising and marketing
drills them into people because that's what this system requires
this system based off of consumption.
We need to rethink our entire value system.
I would say we need to move towards what we call
a sustainable value system, meaning
it's aligning to the natural order of reality.
It aligns to natural law.
There's many different social myths in society
and they're addressed abundantly
throughout The Zeitgeist Movement's literature.
For example, people's beliefs in human nature
that we're born a certain way
or our preference towards competitive tendencies
our beliefs in free will, or incentive
what actually motivates people.
These things really need to be understood for what they actually are.
I'll give you an example: our beliefs in free will
that people can simply make choices
free from their environmental stimuli
that create these types of values.
You simply, you know...
If you're brought up in the Middle East into a Muslim family
and you have no other influences
with regards to other religions or other ways of life
what's the chance that you'll become a Christian or Jewish
or any other religion?
Pretty low. We need to understand
that we're essentially products of our environment
that our values come from the social system at large
our values and behaviors
and we need to understand this relationship.
If you take the example of free will
this assumption extends to the depths of society.
Look at our prison and legal systems.
These systems are based on the assumption that people have free choice
that they commit these so-called 'criminal' acts
and we ignore the basis in society
for why these supposed crimes actually take place.
Crimes are just a response to social insufficiency
or people being treated in a negative manner.
We need to move towards a sustainable value system
which would be values based on cooperation
and compassion, empathy, reciprocity and a system
where the negative attributes of our system today
are just conditioned out.
- What is the plan to put a Resource-Based Economy in place?
- If everyone or a majority of people in society
understood that this direction is beneficial
and we wanted to move towards it
and we were at the point in which we wanted to implement this thing
the first step would be to do a survey of all earthly resources.
It really makes little sense to start any other way.
We need to know what we actually have on the planet
before we can operate in any type of responsible manner
with regard to efficient, sustainable use of resources.
We do a survey of all resources on the planet
or as many as we can locate at the current time
with regards to minerals, iron ore deposits
the most potent locations for renewable energy
whether it be geothermal, solar, wind, wave, tidal
(endless supply of renewable energies that we have)
to all the different technological capabilities we have
and how that applies to efficient production and distribution systems.
Once we have this survey, we essentially apply it to the system.
It's a self-generating system.
Once we have the information
that information dictates how we then proceed.
That's not based on my opinion or your opinion
or anyone else's opinion or even a scientist's opinion.
It's based on the best available information
that we have at a certain time
and essentially everything would unfold
from the basic goal of efficiency
and sustainability without the need for monetary exchange.
This is an outdated concept and we simply just don't need it anymore.
It impedes social progress and does little, if anything,
to actually provide an incentive for advancing social progress.
- Well, do you anticipate resistance
from those who profess to have a monetary economy?
- Sure. In the meantime
there are people who have an emotional inclination
towards supporting this system and that's really what it is.
It's less of an intellectual struggle on our part
than breaking through emotional barriers
that have become so ingrained in people
that they find it essentially painful to consider any other position
whether it be from a religious background or political background
or any type of economic dogma, screwed up from the system.
They're all the same in the sense
that they're not emergent value systems.
In a Resource-Based Economy people would be educated
to accept change very quickly. That's what this system would need.
We need an emergent system rather than an established system
and people today are conditioned to have established value systems
such that they cling on to it for dear life
until something so drastic
eventually challenges that value system and they're forced to shift.
That's essentially the history of social change.
If people are out of a job and out of their house, maybe then
even the most ardent free market capitalists will start to wonder
and question the very system that they support.
In terms of the people at the top, people always ask
"Well how do you expect to convince people at the top, the top 1%?"
If we have a majority of people who understand
a new socioeconomic system such as a Resource-Based Economy
the people at the top are going to have very little say
as to what the rest of society does.
And even then, the people at the top would be so much better
living in a Resource-Based Economy
with all the reduced stress, the access abundance
to essentially everything it is they'd possibly require
without any of the dangers that our current system imposes on them.
Even they're not exempt from environmental pollution
food contaminants, income inequality which actually affects
even the richest in society (studies now conclude)
so even they would be better off in this type of social arrangement.
- How does the timing of the global uprising
that we're experiencing now
come into play with the implementation of a Resource-Based Economy?
- I think we're at a point in time now where many thresholds
have been crossed in terms of being able to accept this system
and just carry on with business as usual.
The protests are probably a testament to the fact
that social conditions are worsening
for a majority of people in the world, and they're starting to wake up
to the fact that this system doesn't serve them
in their best interest.
To directly answer your question, it's almost like a Catch-22
because if society completely collapses
it's going to be a lot more difficult to spread awareness
about a new possible social system.
At the same time, if this system maintains itself for much longer
we may pass the point of no return environmentally
and it will become impossible to even implement this type of thing.
I don't know when we would pass that point
but basically it's a very delicate balance we need to walk
and essentially The Zeitgeist Movement understands
that we just need to move forward with this information
and work as hard as we possibly can to get this information out there.
- Well, how can people find out more about The Zeitgeist Movement?
- They can go to www.TheZeitgeistMovement.com.
That's our official, global website
where you can link to all the other chapters in the world.
You can find our Orientation Guide
which denotes the trains of thought advocated by The Movement
and all the supportive evidence
for how we've arrived at this Resource-Based Economy.
There are many different lectures that you can view.
As far as locally, Zeitgeist Vancouver is active
on a weekly basis in downtown Vancouver
at the Vancouver Art Gallery where we engage passers-by
with DVDs, engage in meaningful discussion
and just distribute as much information as we can
to try to reach as many new people as possible.
This has been our best method that we've found for activism
as opposed to closed-type meetings where
you're essentially preaching to the choir.
These things are important to get more information out there
for people who are interested, but the most critical work that we do
I think needs to be in reaching new people
and that's where our efforts lie.
As far as our local website, you can go to ZeitgeistVancouver.com
and you can read all about our events that we've done in the past
as well as our upcoming ones, all the different local media we've done
as well as just everything else that's relevant on a local level.
For more information about the Zeitgeist Movement
please visit: www.TheZeitgeistMovement.com
http://Zeitgeist-Canada.com | http://ZeitgeistVancouver.com