Tom Williams,

“Believe me I am an extremely happy & well adjusted person, what makes me unhappy is injustice & suffering in the world and since I was a little kid I felt I should try & do something about this. I think Jacque Fresco is a wise & intelligent old man but I`m certainly not going to follow him to the ends of the earth blindly following without question, as he says in his interview in the film “there can never be perfection because we are human so it`s not possible.”

~~~

Good. So am I. Sounds to me then that we are in agreement. I think the problem I have is I see no clearly defined call for ACTION, NOW! People all across the world are suffering terribly. There are MILLIONS of displaced people who could benefit mightily from an organization that found a way to pull volunteers and resources together to help them.

That is not a negative view. That is a view of reality.

Now to our very own society.

Who are the people who are lazy, need a leader, want a leader so bad, they willingly give up their free choice [and ability to think for themselves] so as to be led?

Who as been in control since 2000? Who put them there? Who followed blindly every whim, maskerading as leadership “farted” from those in charge? Who still speaks from the pulpit and the talk show, the media and the blog, telling us how bad the dems will make things? Who never seems to understand things are already bad, and who made “things” that way? And who tries, one way or another, to imply anything not repub must be against God?

Who absolutely can not understand the methods Obama is trying to put in place to restore our fiscal soundness? And why can’t they? Why can’t their leaders? Did the mess we find ourselves in just happen? Or was it the inevitable outcome of a whole society deciding to let George [literally] do it? What would you call people who are to lazy to lead and think for themselves? Do you think if there weren’t a whole lot of them maybe we wouldn’t be in the mess we are in? That’s not negative thinking, that’s a call to examine reality.

Having vision, seeing problems, identifying solutions, that’s all good. I don’t fault that. I don’t fault any philosopher or teacher who can inspire positive action. But at some point in time the inspiration has to transform INTO positive action, or it’s simply knowledge. Knowledge is good, but taking the knowledge and actually bringing about real, tangible, I can see it, it is real, results. [Like you mention re: Obama] is better. You note that change is an evolution. I note evolving to actual change requires action.

Action that is on-going and relevant to real-world need.

And that is the “other.” The millions who never hear the grand goals, but would understand and respond to positive action on their behalf. As you point out, “change the conditions & the people change accordingly it really is almost that simple.” It is EXACTLY that simple! The world is full of examples where that has happened. Unfortunately the do-ers are to few and the need is often overwhelming. And always there is some greedy creep lurking in the background, ready to turn good intentions into unearned income.

And that’s not negative thinking, just the reality of history. So knowing what’s wrong has to be followed by action, which in turn, HAS to be constant and on-going!

M.B.S.S.

Thanks for posting the Moyer link.

Tom Williams,

Much of what Venice Project says I find admirable. But much I see as wishful thinking. A perfect city, no matter how environmentally perfect can never be perfect, because people aren’t perfect. An organised society, like any organised religion can never perfect all of the people, all of the time, because people resist being molded.

I’m suspect of any project developed by a single individual. Even if the sought after goals are intended to improve the whole of society. Is this man reflective of the needs of the whole of society? I don’t doubt his credentials or the value of his ideas. But they are his and reflect his version of all things. He may see and understand the problems we daily grapple with, but I think his solutions are unworkable.

Eliminating money for example. Money became the tangible “thing” developed by man to keep “value” track of the exchange of goods and services. It was not initially created for the purpose of a single man, or group of men to enrich themselves.

The perversion is in man, not money. We could do away with money and move to a simple economy based on the exchange of goods and services and develop another tangible thing to keep “value” track of the exchange and not call it money. But nothing would change. Those who always want more, and those who enjoy control would find a way to control the exchange, or the tangible thing representing the “value” of the exchange.

The Venice Project will never take hold world-wide, because it operates on the assumption that people are all the same. They aren’t. That value on goods and services are equal across the globe. They aren’t. And that the abuses of Corporate Power will willingly relinquish their strangle-hold on us all. They wont.

We all understand something is terribly wrong with our system. But all the same, for all it’s faults, Constitutional Government is still the best form of government that has ever been developed. The only real solution is to demand we, our leaders [religious and otherwise] and our government return to Constitutional Law!

Where we have failed, is in our unwillingness to take charge of our individual selves. We are lazy. We need a leader. We want a leader. So bad that sometimes people willingly give up their free choice so as to be accepted by a leader. The Venice Project is a lovely idea reaching out to unhappy people seeing themselves being happy by sharing the vision of a wise leader. The prospect is sweetened by the offer of a forward looking happy society for all. But where are the plans for the others? The huge diversity of the others.

Are the folks at Venice Project working across the world to develop cheap housing, using available resources along the model of the dome or underground house? If not, why not?

In the real world there are whole displaced societies living on bare ground? The small dome home is ideally suited to materials available in the most poverty stricken areas in the world. Could be constructed quickly, using available resources, self labor and already available solar technology. Maybe what we need is a Project that will actually organize and deliver. If they could overcome the wars that is. And the dictators and wannabee dictators who keep the wars going. And the CORPORATIONS who benefit from the wars that keep going.

Maybe I need to organize a “project,” ask for donations and build my dream home. Then I could create a vision of a perfect world. Target eliminating a few accepted “bad” things as part of my vision, and for more donations [tax deductible of course] allow others to share my vision - just so long as they did it my way.

No, I wouldn’t like that. I’m too fond of free agency and diversity.

this is the reason Keith Olbermann’s “special comments” are so, so, what word to use: stirring?
unsettling, remarkable…....because they are
#1 written well?, #2 about morality?, #3 partial to
the truth as he sees it of course….........old fashioned outrage….......directed at some outrageous act…......

Personally I would be happy if just one reporter would
risk his continued access, to simply reply when confronted with obivous lies, spin, and contorted logic:  “really?”  “that’s what you really want to say to the audiance?”  “you know damm good and well that’s a damm lie - or damm spin, or damm logic, or taken out of context, or any other situation.” Just risk it all to call a damm liar, a damm liar to his face!  just once.  no polite hedging, no dancing around.  just once….......

Main stream American News Media’s credibility has been bankrupt for at least 50 years; is it really, just now understood by the ordinary American? The fact that, most major news media are businesses points to a conflict in reporting the facts in a way that would not first serve them.
What the media tries to pass off as unbiased reporting is little more than propaganda aimed at supporting their bottom line and confusing issues that any ordinary person could understand if they are given the facts without the “commentary”.
The editors and producers of programming carefully decide the criteria of their broadcasts and I am sure they would not like to have the general public know what particular interests are served in making their decisions.
In listening and talking with others, I can only conclude, there are generally two types of news consumers, those who decide to accept what is said or printed and those who question what the news media is “reporting”.
It has always been left to the individual to seek the sources of information to base their views. Those concerned with the unbiased facts will seek multiple sources for information and commentary.
It is painfully obvious that the corporate media distort the facts by any and all means, to serve the interests of a better bottom line (to hell with the facts and its realities).
Awareness of the news media’s propensity for serving their own interests is necessary to judging their credibility. Blaming the news media for our ignorance does not relieve us from the responsibility of learning the facts we need to make informed judgments of the events.
The “facts” are always based on the perceptions of those who witness an event and the perceptions of those who witness the event may be influenced or manipulated to the interests of those charged with “reporting” it. Therefore, beware of your source of information and always search for other views.

Impartiality…Morality…I would settle for just the pure truth—and on a regular basis. With pictures.

> M.B.S.S., February 8 at 8:05 pm;

Your welcome and thanks. More pictures coming soon.

Fisk is of course correct. With the best reporting no longer mainstream; good information (accurate) is becoming harder to come by “for the average” news reading citizen because one must actually seek it out. The situation is further exacerbated by our propensity towards laziness (wanting everything spoon fed to us) and then there are our prejudices which tend to keep us from the truth because it’s not what we really want to hear. We are the victims of our own inclinations.

http://whatintheworld-icarus.blogspot.com/

thanks verne.

good pictures on your blog.

Here this is Moyers actual interview

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/02062009/watch.html

http://whatintheworld-icarus.blogspot.com/

bear with me as i reference something that seems tangentially related but i feel is an important adjunct to this discussion.  glenn greenwald and jay rosen talk to bill moyers about the media and other things:

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/02062009/transcript4.html?print

btw, i originally found the link on openleft

http://openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=11461

“Impartiality”, a journalistic red herring, has come to signify the moral relativism that has swept the opinion managers, and infiltrated greater society disguised as a virtue.

Television’s idea of impartiality leads to the withering, formulaic, talking-point messaging that is fobbed off as real debate. Drama is simulated by finding someone, anyone who can string a couple of sentences together, to defend every harebrained notion from alleged Iraqi involvement in 9/11 (remember that gem?)  to intelligent design.

While all of this translates into higher ratings and greater revenue for the parent corporation, Homo Domesticus gets buried in a slagheap of junk science, Orwellian newspeak, oxymoronic Expert Opinion, and lifestyle trivia (to trivialize your life). Worse, these carnival barkers often end up mainstreaming ideas that would otherwise, rightfully, wilt on the vine. Velveeta has more in common with cheese than any of this infotainment has with meaning. Of course, if Baudrillard is right, then the very purpose of media in our post modern era is to destroy all meaning.

Thanks Mr Fisk for reminding us just how far journalism has backed away, not merely from the truth, but even from the ideal of truth. If you ask me, it’ll take a little more than moral outrage to get us out of this hall of mirrors. But then again, I’m biased.

The recent war coverage by the american MSM is mearly a culmination of a well orchestrated alliance between corp america and an opressive and secrective american government.

It all started back in the late 1960’s when the government first realized that the people could indeed effect change in their nation through the power of the fourth estate. What attrocities would have occured in Vietnam and in the US if the media had not been front and center with cameras rolling? Pictures of crying children and the broken bodies of the dead gave some americans their first awful glimps of true war. They also gave WWII veterans a terrible trip down memory lane, but this time there was no Hitler, no Tojo, so no good reason to slaughter tens of thousands of american soldiers, and countless millions of southeast Asian civilians. The press at that time reminded us of who we were, who we should be, and who we could become, with just a little push in the wrong direction.

Torture, anyone?

The last gasp of the free US media was Watergate. The power of a truely free press was exercised in bringing down a beast of man, and his awful presidency. But it was not long after that that corp america and the power establishment in our government sprang to action to cut of the balls of the free media so an insurrection of the watergate persuasion could never be allowed to happen again. The conservative think tanks and foundations were formed and the “fairness doctrine” was applied by the government and thus the sheeple media was born. The media no longer asks tough questions, investigates any wrongdoing, or calls a politian out on the carpet. They a mearly a condiut for government and corporate press releases. There is no more media in america, just PR firms with the names CNN, NBC, ABC, CBS, FOX, ect. And now that things in the good ol USA are not going well, we don’t even notice, or care anymore about the media. I’ve got too much debt, I might lose my job, my health insurance sucks. Why should I give a damn about some subhuman arab being tortured? I’ve got bills to pay!

The ultimate class equalizer was the free media, and now it has been taken from us. The worst part is, we didn’t even notice. The true question will be, will we miss a free media the day we are sitting in a holding cell, with a split lip, and bruised ribs, having just confessed to double parking on a street we have never been on?

Ben Franklin was right, no free press, no freedom.

Dear louise, `good writing & good thinking` is not a vanishing thing, the crap pumped out by the `Mainstrea Media` want you to think that & believe that there is no alternative. We at the`Zeitgeist Movement` and `The venus project` have been working on a new direction for humanity for a long time now, knowing that our present `System` would one day collapse. Mr Fisk is a decent man I`ve attended a number of discussions he`s held here in London, but he could write for eternity & would not see much significant change for the world while we continue to live trapped by the `Monetary system`, which is the root cause of our problems. War, poverty, scarcity & human suffering will continue in the world as long as this system is in place.
We have to accept whether we like it or not that
Capitalism, communism, facism and socialism, the media, relgious institutions, banks & corporations are all failed systems/institutions & no longer relevant to our survival on this planet.
We advocate a new `social system` & `Resource based economy` based on present day technology & thinking,
which puts emphasis on people & their well being not the pursuit of profit, which will be eliminated.
If you have some time i`d like you to visit our website http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com & watch our movie `Zeitgeist Addendum` where we address the current problems and offer a possible solution to our present
difficulties. Also if you visit http://www.thevenusproject.com we show how these ideas can be practically applied. If you do get time to view this stuff maybe you could give some feedback & let me know what you think, positive or negative, all comments are welcome as we realise we can never make things perfect, but the more input we have the better it will be for all of us, we want a society where everyones opinion matters. Thanks for listening, & keep your chin up, there are lots of people out in the world who care about you & your well being, love conquers all, the bad guys have had it their way too long, the next stage of evolution starts now, peace & take care, kind regards,
Tom Williams

Good writing like the process of good thinking is a vanishing thing. Even were we blessed to have such eloquence and visual impact as we had in the past, few would read it. Let alone understand it.

We have become a society of instant. Instant food. Instant satisfaction. Instant wealth. [credit] Instant everything except knowledge. Instant stupidity would be more accurate.

We plug our brains into the TV, the phone growing from our ear, the screen staring back at us and quickly scan through all the information at our fingertips, and think we are informed. Even when given the opportunity to read a good book, or watch/listen to media that’s independent and thoughtful, if it interferes with our programed day, we never bother.

Who or what do we blame? A dumb-downed media, a dumb-downed population or a dumb-downed education?

We are after all, both the product and the consumer. And that alone goes a long way to explaining why our “system” is failing.

We would be in a better place if reporting from some moral center were only limited to war reporting. The lack of individualistic reporting from a position of morality is so rare these days as to be almost unknown to consumers of reportage.

What we get instead is reporting from a corporate perspective, a la the MSM.

We have MSM reporters not challenging spin that rewrites stimulus initiatives as being somehow separate from spending, with the end result being a complete corrupting of basic principles taught in any Econ 101 course. They just repeat the fallacy, therefore making it appear as though it is valid. With the world economy coming apart at the seams, what moral position does that convey?

They give so much time and/or column inches to these distorters that it makes it seem they have a valid argument — instead of underlining the fact these same people are the very ones who caused the economic meltdown in the first place.

What is their moral responsibility in propping up the destroyers of constitution and national economies and challenging those who hope to save the country’s economic and legal welfare?

They are mostly just paid propagandists, not reporters of fact and, in that, they have completely lost their moral underpinnings.

I should say that by their “impartiality,” tne bloodless toadies of the media mean their unfailing partiality, their understandable need to bow and scrape and kiss the ring of their paymasters and the political serpants-s-s-s who serve them.

Look, most men are animals who live for the animal ends of health, wealth, progeny and a little fun. What they are not is…human. To be human is to operate from the heart, the level of compassion, and therefore the sufferings of one’s fellow men is uppermost in one’s mind, is, in truth, one’s own.

And there’s the rub. Robert Fisk is a human being, and he dearly wishes his fellow reporters were too, and that their humanity might then be reflected—however faintly—in their reportage. Fat chance.

You’re a good man, Robert Fisk. May your like increase.

A buss mans Holiday. I know several newspaper workers.  I would guess none have heard of the book you referenced.

Snyder and Morris’s 1949 A Treasury of Great Reporting.

You are doing a great job.

I wonder if we still write like this.

You’re one of the few with enough of a conscience to do so, Mr. Fisk.

Not hardly.