TROM: The Reality of Me

TROM: The Reality of Me

Ratings: 8.23/10 from 30 users.

TROM: The Reality of MeThe TROM documentary is trying to present, in a simplistic way, the world in which we, human beings, live.

The world discovered so far, not some idea or personal choice. Moreover we tried to present alternative solutions to current problems and took into account the future, which promises to be more than interesting.

An informative documentary, perhaps shocking and disturbing to many, depending on how you digest the information. The documentary is divided into chapters and sub-chapters due to documentary's excessive length.

More great documentaries

110 Comments / User Reviews

  1. the background music is a drill to the brain. having a small piece of music repeated billions of times causes brain damage! the content of these videos are fine but the background music is a real problem and makes one reluctant to watch the whole series. i am not sure what did he/she think when put this brain drilling constant torture as a background to these videos?!!! very unprofessional.

    1. I agree. Why is music even necessary when watching a documentary??? The music is often louder than the voices giving the information. I find it intolerable and just stop watching.

  2. Knowledge of the Internet should be free subscriptions to people over 65 years old, nursing homes and retirement communities.

  3. In response to part 2.1, money actually preceded bartering. The producers of TROM should read David Graeber's "Debt."

  4. What's with all the woo woo music in the background. Sheesh.

  5. imagine 15,000 doctors the best monds working one one medication ,or 15,0000 luthiers designing one guitar , think about the type of world it would be when there are no copyrights no built in selfishness in the system, imagine that the world's people are your family and the world is your property free access to collaborate on the construction and engineering of a city if you have a valid view, a world where we all work to advance our selves and the society we live it

  6. Terrifically impressed by the debates on this forum however I do wish you wouldn't keep referring to five senses. I can't speak for anyone else but I have more than five, my sense of direction is quite developed. I easily sense when I'm being watched and then theres the odd ability to find the same point on both sides of a sheet of material with my fingertips. The last I use regularly in my work as a carpenter and I was told and forgot the name of this facility but it is definitely a 'sense', there are others. . . .

    On the topic(s) of things wrong with society recommend googling Frank Herbert's BuSab.

    [Haven't finished watching so decline to comment on the doc, but the discussions here are great]

    1. You're correct when you say that being able to find your fingertips between a sheet of paper. It's called Proprioception, it is the awareness of the relative position of parts of the body without getting information from other senses.

    2. That's the bunny! Proprioception, except it's normally a sheet of plywood or drywall in my case ; )

  7. Same 'ol story in the end. Some form of communism. This is basically a technocratic communism... but communism just the same. Everything is owned by everybody, except rationed by computers instead of men. Who programs the computers?

    The problem with this whole idea is that SOME people just HAVE to be more than equal to everyone else. Men, and women, are competitive animals.

    I think the key to our future... if we are to make it better... is to LOCALIZE EVERYTHING... taking power away from centralized, bureaucratic nightmare governments and putting the power back in the people's hands.

    Ron Paul has it right. The Founders of the U.S. had it right. Local government and liberty for the people. Low taxes. Local government. Local education, by the family. Local agriculture. Sound money that has intrinsic value. Free markets. Not crony capitalism. Government that protects the rights of the average person... not having it's hand in everything, and showing favoritism to a select few. There is nothing wrong with competition, it just has to be FAIR competition. "We the people" can solve our problems. Governments always seek more power.

    Education is key, however. In the U.S., home-schooled children are MUCH better educated and know much more about the problems with our environment than kids who go to public school. Education is the key to the environmental and resource depletion issues.

    We are animals. We cannot be managed by computers and stay sane. Competition and ambition are part of our physiology. Look at sports. Why were they invented? Competition.

    Just my 2 cents.

  8. I'm 29 years old, and I have recently over the last couple years begun to understand the situation we are facing. And I don't mean the energy crisis, or polotics, or even war. When you start to understand( and i think im still a novice at it im sure, understanding lol....) what the monetary system is, and how long its been apart of us, all of us everywhere and almost everywhen, you get this feeling that not only do things need to change, but that it is finally coming to the point of change. I wish i could believe that the change will be suttle and peaceful. But that will not be what happens. Look at the people in power. The super rich have about as much control over the human population as you could possibly have. Through the media, polotics(armies controlled by governments), religion, fear tactics(devide us), $$$$$$$, energy, food(monsanto). The monetary system has alowed the most corrupt human beings on earth to take advantage of the system, and are NOW in position to control the rest of us like livestock. Its happening before our eyes. And we are letting it happen. Most of us WANT it to happen. I don't know what to do. I make ******* febreeze for a living for christs sake and hate what im doing and how im contributing to this mess. I mean whas more useless and trivial then febreeze? Do you want your house to smell like tropical thai dragonfruit? I mean wtf does that even mean? Have you ever seen a tropical dragon fruit from thailand!? This is not the world i was brought up to believe it was. I was lied to by priests, teachers, family, media, saturday morning cartoons(when they were good!). If we have a change it will not be like how the end of the zeitgeist films show. It will be the most violent conflict in human history. ANd it will be hundreds of years at least in picking up the pieces. The only reason i say this is that the people who want the change, are a small minority and are a very peaceful group for the most part. It will take the violent desperation of realizing how you are being ****** out of the life we should ALL have to seep into the rest of us. And people will be very angry when that realization hits home. The people in power will not let go, and the majority will either rise up, or be subjecated. Its such a mess. I used to say, not in my lifetime. But now im having second thoughts. Things are coming to a head. Time will tell, but one thing is certain in my mind. The wonderful world i grew up in, is defenitely not the real world i now live in.

  9. This is pretty awesome. Ive watched hours, and am loving this. Don't make an opinion on it until after the sub-chapter for the environment. I believe its the 3rd or 4th video on the playlist. If you are still not interested then i would stop at that point. But thats what really hooked me into watching the rest.

  10. ask yourself what nature does... not people... i mean animals... what they do and how they survive and thrive? u might say "but we r not animals" .... Are you sure? where do we come from? what is death if it's not another part of the life cycle? Bad things are the things we don't like, the universe doesn't have right or wrong... we do... (words and abstractions) and here's another thing... when you compete to get someone else's objectives u are competing against nature and your neighbours but when you seek your own U compete against yourself and time with nature by your side...

    1. But you don't live in nature, seems like you pick and choose what ever you like to justify your ideas.

    2. hi johann yes of course, everybody does that. During your lifetime I guess you've been teached more things than you can recall but wich ones you've really learned? (those that you have liked the most -and you'll keep doing that)... That's yours or in this case my "frame of reference"... (from that we start justifying our ideas and you're doing it too in your reply -wich i liked very much because i guess /don't really know/ but guess you didn't like my opinion and that's awesome - because if U didn't post your reply driven by your "likes" we might never had this chat and because we are having this chat (using words and sharing our particular thoughts in a particular language - english - ) we make a connection "outside" ourselves -with each other - A constructive dialogue driven by our "likes"... isn't it great? Thanks a lot for your reply and sorry for my english and for the delay of mine... ho (almost forgot) and about nature yes, we do live inside nature within another nature modified by us... we can't escape nature even if we've never been in the coutryside or the middle of africa... everything exist within the universe and so inside nature...

  11. little pieces of truth carefully mixed with "solutions"... hehehe =o))) it looks suspicious (like zeitgeist that uses some weird techniques and some r used in hypnosis induction [sound, images, flashes, even the voice it's creepy tuned]) First it's telling u that u have to find solutions by yourself then when you love it and your mind is open aha!!! gives u "the solution" ;o) English isn't my first tongue (i guess you've noticed by now), and that's why i have to think it first and i have a little filter [I understand every word but my brain does a different process to do it], but for you every word goes straight to your brain. Watch it 'cause it's fun and "the truth" parts are what they are but at least be aware and conscious of it =o) cheers =o)))

  12. Have watched a few hours now - have some issues regarding the claim of J Fresco that figurative language is a problem and that we'd be better off with computer software style languages without ambiguity - so goodbye art. Also, if we don't love each other, what's the point of bothering anyway? More when ~I've watched more...

  13. ten minutes in...its ******* annoying,kinda like an enlightening version of sesame street.

  14. in a monetary system there is no responsibility for anything but profit fact. the monetary system's core is corruption not a byproduct. you have to lie cheat rob and steal to be a part of the monetary can not be competitive without displaying the psychological development of a child fact.for every individual this is a billionaire, a billion people are dying starving and are treated less than ****.fact. if i was a master and you were a slave i could trap you into perpetual debt and interest on your car and house and i would not have to feed you or house you yet your distributing your hard earned money up the pyramid to me. fact. in a monetary system the world is a styro-foam ashtray we all **** on . wasting resources on producing items that fall apart and break so we can slave at work and buy crap from the dollar store with no chemical regulations shipped by china. wake up this doc is about a system that actually addresses problems instead of puking all over every living thing and making hieroglyphics out of feces. we are conditioned by the very system that our forefathers left for. slaves to a system that degrades and rejects us by our differences. we judge our appearance by airbrushed models why? so a company can sell makeup? is that not corruption? our children are being taught to live by impulses of shopping to lie to sell a product, if I just have more....(money) i'll be okay keep telling yourself that its a big monopoly game where the very rules remove our value at the beginning. by the time an individual is in high school they have been stripped of their uniqueness beat up and spit on for being different planning to take out loans for college that will enslave them to dept right out the gate get married in their twenties have kids before their able to get a good strategy on how to survive in this disgusting monetary system. we are taught to specialize in one area giving us a fragmented picture of reality. all our money is debt we are debt slavery is nothing but dept remove the money remove the dept and there is no slave.

  15. this whole documentary is incredible. Explains similar beliefs Ive recently had into harmonized and rational ideas. Amazing. This needs to go viral. Spread the word

    1. is it really that good? its really long....
      13 hours? i mean come on...

  16. People please give this documentary your attention. The video is so informative and educational and thought provoking that it should be required watching for all mankind. Please take the time and enlighten yourselves. Don’t listen to what some of the others have said pertaining to this documentary –you be the judge and I’m certain you’ll be pleased.

  17. A must watch and learn documentary for all the people, this documentary is too straight in pointing out the truth. For those who find it tough to understand, this documentary would seem disoriented. Give it a little bit of thought, it makes perfect sense.

    Thank you Vlatko!

  18. C***... Plain and simple.. Lets bring everyone down to the lowest common denominator. Liberals are a strange beast. No problem telling everyone else they must live by their laws in some world government. Didn't Einstein like the idea of world government only to flee his country when the sh-t hit the fan. Do they not get it? one government doesn't ensure it will be just or become corrupt after 10yrs? They tell me I should live in the same exact house as my neighbor without thinking I might not want to? Can't be an individual, nope. It must be me but when I didn't know why I was doing something in school, I asked or looked it up in the library. Of course if you take money out of the picture people work by passion but you still need farmers, etc.. Scares me people think like this.. Like we are a pawn in their world. We have borders to keep our traditions and values. To think this isn't the world people have created is complete ****. FYI- Everyone should watch it.. good ideas bad implementation. You should know what these people are thinking.

    1. you've taken the information that was given by this film and re-translated it into new meanings and a new message. what your saying is not what the film said watch it again and pay attention to your mind creating associations to unrelated material. good luck

  19. sometimes i think it can be healthy and unhealthy to think about these things.. if you didn't think about these things where would you be, probably better off in the current society oblivious to all of this. On the other hand if your aware of what is actually going on, it can draw you away from the facts of society. In my opinion its not healthy or unhealthy, just see it from a wider angle.
    Thinking about all this may cause people to lose sleep, because most people are caught up in this present system or whatever you want to call it, but the fact they are aware of what is actually going on creates a world of **** for the individual, but this world of **** may produce something great, because of the fact they have to face the world of **** in order to be free and to understand the ****, instead of escaping though other things like there jobs or whatever.
    I guess what I'm trying to say is get your **** and put it together in a creative and understanding way, which i am currently in the process of.
    thank you and good night

  20. This doco is doing it's job. Getting us to think outside of our conditioning. Yes it shows alternative scenarios that seem unrealistic. So what ? In order for the structure of the human race to change we need to change the way we think and this doco is exposing the way we are conditioned and why we are conditioned that way. Instead of finding the negatives in this to enchant your own ego's why not Think about how you are conditioned and what type of a world you would like to live in. Is that world for the betterment of all man kind or for the betterment of yourself ?

  21. The people who don't wish for this change I speak of are those that don't wish to export their local resources to some global authority. The practice of importing and exporting "resources" (which is code for removing portions of a once living system for human use) is what got us in this mess in the first place. What do you do when a local populace doesn't want that? Kill them? Imprison them and make them watch pretensions documentaries until they change their minds? I would personally fight to prevent such a global culture and I'm not alone. Can such a future be brought about without a horrible war machine to force it?

    Yes, ownership is the problem. But I see no thorough exploration of the environments that humans have created in the past that did not give rise to ownership.

    Also, the idea that there is no human nature (tabula rasa) is far from proven. There is much evidence to the contrary. The framework for things like language syntax, walking/running, fear response to loud noises, etc. are all part of the hard-wired but extremely flexible human mind. Modern human behaviour is not human nature, but human nature's response to the modern industrial environment. My argument is that what is proposed by this doc is not better than what we have, but is what we have more or less. I have no confidence that this New NEW World Order would behave any differently than the OLD New World Order because it's still a WORLD ORDER; as open to abuses of power and subjugation of marginal populations as any other large scale system.

    1. First... you´re judging the system with the preconceptions of your own system (sorry.. our system). From what I understood of the system, there wouldn ´t be a global authority like you say. There would be a monitoring global system where everyone is involved... the resources of a certain location are to be managed for everyone's gain... think of what you would economize, the waste you would cut down. And yes that is the Utopia... that´s really the hard part... and like you I can´t imagine a way to change this view... but it´s a valid and better idea then the use of resources for the gain of just a few, and a daily struggle among Man Kind just to survive, just like you have with the new savage capitalism... I´m not saying this is achievable... but we should definitively walk in this direction... and maybe, just maybe some day we will get there... not you and me of course...

      Let´s start to make a real usage of the word Economy for a change...

      It´s not a World order... and you don´t have to force anyone. If this happens it will be a transition with no significant markers... and the way people think changes gradually through education... I like to give the example of recycling... I remember when it started in a significant manner... and I remember when no one cared to do it... now every one does it... or say it does... it´s true that they may be lying... but a social construct was changed... and not recycling now a days is considered a bad conduct... and people tend to work on what is expected of them, nobody is gonna point a gun at them... they just know it to be a good thing.

      As for Human nature... you described the ways we interact with the world... it´s true we have innate qualities to ourselves... but that doesn't mean we´re going to react always the same... even a cat has that kind of flexibility...
      sorry to say that the nature vs nurture question is pending to nurture... I should know since my field is related...
      corruption... bullying... robbery... murder... this only happens when there is something to gain... and the capacity for such atrocity's is based on something that also produces caring... solidarity... brotherhood... that is Empathy!! after all we don´t go around killing one another anymore just cuz we don't agree on something... if there is no need for it... why do it...?? of course there will be bad examples always... and there will always be abuses of power or attempts to do it but you cut down so, so much waste and crime

      ... hell ... if we find it boring... they can make a doc on how it would be nice to have a system were all is fair... were starving people to dead cuz they were born in the wrong continent is ok as long as me and my family are good... and the millions keep coming... then it´s all just fine.

      If competition is self improving... then everyone should have the same conditions to least... otherwise it´s just unfair... (I´m not defending communism...that´s a whole different debate... I´m just saying) :)


  22. Science is a method that is very good at modelling systems that can be reduced to independent variables (e.g. physics, chemistry, etc). However, it is piss poor at dealing with systems that are interrelated and complex, like ecosystems, the human mind or anything else of day to day importance. There is seemly no regard for the complexity of nature by these Zeitgeist fools beyond CGI pandas and sea turtles outside their dome cities that they don't have the energy, technology or materials to build.

    And by the way, solar panels rely on rare minerals as well as common ones, tidal power is unworkable to maintain due to the corrosive properties of salt water, geothermal dredges up massive quantities of arsenic into the groundwater, there's not enough manufacturing infrastructure for wind power to be implemented and nuclear is as finite as fossil fuels. All this is as unrealistic as any other global utopian pipe dream. Good visual editing though.

  23. Happy Valentines to all, and as for the reality of singles, as my daughter pointed out on her facebook page this morning:
    Don't forget that blow jobs are like flowers for men and that it is a perfect time to reflect on all your horrible dating choices since last Valentines day.

  24. I especially loved all the Richard Feynman quotes! That man was an incredible human and my greatest inspiration to lead a life in which I never stop learning!

  25. It was a long Sunday and I think I got bedsores haha but I watched this straight through and very much liked it! If only most people could know and understand these things!!

  26. I found the way this was presented distracting and pointless. However the content was a very relevent and accurate discription of the problems facing our modern society. Humanity is suffering and it doesent need to be. Granted Im not sure what form the new system should take and I found some of their ideas concerning what should replace the monitary system a lil bit farfetched. That being said change is coming and it may be very hard on those of us alive today. You can see it already in Lybia, Seria and Egypt. The people are becoming connected in a way that was impossible a mere 15 years ago. Literaly billions of people previosly little more bondslaves to their govenments have unlimited access to any information. Who knows what the free exchange of information might produce in the next ten twenty or one hundred years. I belive right now is a very dangerous time for our species. We are running out of time now to solve problems that are 40 or 50 years from now. Our way of life has worked very good to get us to this point but if we are to continue indefinetly our govenments ALL OF THEM need to decide whether they are going work for our species or end us as a species. The shortterm mindset that we have been running on for the last hundred years or so can only end in the loss of a huge pecentage of humanity. We need to get real smart real soon

  27. Meeting all human needs and desires with machines is supposed to lead to an outburst of human creativity? Technology, as well as art, tend more to come from challenging yet non-restrictive environments. If you remove the need to overcome challenges, you will get a world full of spoiled children, not genius thinkers.

    The modern environment is challenging, but restrictive. The world proposed by this film is touted as non-restrictive (though universally required), but is unchallenging. Both environments produce dullards.

    As to the idea of the new utopia being a more free way of living, what do you do with the people that don't want this change? People with big ideas about the way every single person in the world should live have been many throughout history, and they all tend to claim that there will be peace and prosperity if they succeed.

    I agree with much of this film's analysis of the problems of the modern world. Monetary economies are certainly a problem, but not the root of the problem. They are a symptom of a societies grown to a scale where sharing becomes unwieldy and impractical. There are plenty of examples of cultures that had what is referred to in the film as "resource base economies", but they were all small in scale and didn't tend to build cities or export/import significant amounts of resources. Their innovations were the results of needing to work with what they had, not of boredom. Their tendency for sharing over hoarding was the result of caring about their community, not simply having more than they need. If simply having more than you need directly resulted in sharing, then the monetary economy wouldn't be a problem in the first place. Hoarding is tolerated because the haves do not interact directly with the have nots, allowing them to abstract and disregard them. Do you care deeply and personally about the people that die of cancer making the circuit boards for your computer or plants and animals that die from arsenic poisoning from the mining of the extremely finite minerals requited to make solar panels, cell phones and laptops? Would you if you knew them personally and had to watch them die? Small scale societies are the only examples we have of true sustainability and egalitarianism, but these douche hats want a global society? Sounds like trying to fight fire with gasoline or dig your way out of a hole.

    1. Ok... I understand your point, cuz the first time I heard about a global resource economy I toke the same stand... but man your the example of the people who are dependent on the system... people like you are the symptoms... yes your right that the monetary system is not the root of the problem I give you that much, and your approach does have value. The mane problem is the idea that´s behind... the monetary system is just the functional manifestation of an idea that is eating through all society's ... it´s Ownership... it´s the the deformed notion of freedom that everyone sells this days... the problem is we are suppose to be social creatures... but we live an act in a world where there are "sociable creatures"... we tolerate one another but deep down we go home thinking we don´t depend on one another (globally thinking of course) as long as I have my corner to hell with everyone else... I´m being a little crude just to make my point... sorry about that :)

      If something Humans are adaptable... we made it this far because of that. There is no thing has human nature... there´s human behavior that is directly influenced by our environment... so, to think this system would create spoiled children is offensive... we are problem solvers... and if you think this system would eliminate all problems... man then you´re just naive... this kind of system would alert us to the real problems worth solving... the ones that we did not create for ourselves... it´s all in education...

      Then you talked about everyone who doesn´t want this change... seriously!!! if you have a roof, something to eat every day, know how to write, and never suffered with war... then my friend I can tell you you are among the 8% richest people on the planet... 99% of all crimes ... ALL CRIMES... I´m including war as a crime to... were committed with money involved.... there hasn´t been a single war between Humans that hasn´t been about money or power... OWNERSHIP.

      They´re not thinking about the perfect system, and I agree with some of the things you say... but something´s got to give... the idea is out there... the path we need to take... hell... no one has a clue how to do it... if it´s even doable !!! the point is ... it´s a lot, lot better then what we have... and let´s get serious here it not gonna happen any time soon... and I mean... hundreds and hundreds of years... like the dark ages... :)


  28. If the basis for any scientific theory must be that which can observed through the senses, then isn't there a fundamental flaw in our approach? I can see that it has gotten mankind very far but I'm thinking that in order for us to get any further we must begin thinking in new ways and considering alternative approaches--not only to our methods of problem solving but our very ways of understanding them.

    1. Science doesn't rely on our five senses; it uses very sensitive instruments that can sense far more than us. In fact science discounts eye witness accounts all the time as subjective, that’s the whole point of the scientific method. It is a methodology that allows us to surpass the limitations of subjective preconception. This methodology, coupled with the sophisticated instruments that can sense things far beyond our ability, it is the best show presently in town, if you get my drift. Maybe one day someone will come up with a better methodology, but I think it will simply be an extension of the current scientific method if that is the case. Regardless, we do keep an open mind, at least most scientists do, so if something better comes along we will be the first to jump on the band wagon.

    2. Science does rely on our five senses, how would you see results if science didn't rely on vision?
      And what is vision exactly? Science is not quite sure yet, because it takes vision to explore vision.
      Is what we are seeing really there?

    3. Science also relies on confirmation... if I see that the sky is blue, and you see that the sky is blue... and everyone sees the sky is blue... then at some amount the sky is blue... it´s not changing colors so there is reliability in saying that what your seeing is really there... so even though it´s just an interpretation of what is there... you know that something is there... now for the controversy :) ... if we were all colorblind... we could still measure light waves frequency's... and we would all say that the sky is 620 to 680 THz :)

      then a color sensitive person meets a colorblind person... and he trys to explain the concept of what is blue... and in fact... blue is just a mind processing concept... like is everything else... but... the fact here is that blue is a 620 to 680 THz ligth wave... and with no concept or perception of what is blue, the colorblind person could understand that it has an effect... we don´t rely only in our senses... but we have to translate the information to a language we can understand...


    4. "Science does rely on our five senses, how would you see results if science didn't rely on vision?"

      Simply because I use my eyes to read the results of an instrument that can see far more than my eyes can doesn't mean I am relying on my sesnse to solve the question of measurement. Surely you understand that. You used your fingers, eyes, etc. to type your reply, but we don't credit them for the miracle called the computer that actually sent the message and managed the data. Of course science relies on our senses to some degree, everything does. But to say that our fiive senses are all that is envolved, and therefore are limiting is incredibly short sighted and ridiculous. We are capable of producng instruments that improve upon our senses, like infared technology, x-rays, laser measurment through photo gates, etc. You guys are aware of this or you have been living in a hole for the last hundred years, which is it?
      Of course you can approach the question in a philosophical manner, questioning the meta physics of existence and etc. But, to do so sets us back a few hundred years. The question of metaphysical existence was debated by the Greeks, and every culture since, and could never be settled. This is why it still such an active field in philosophy.
      At some point we have to say, "o.k, we have to start from somewhere and start calling something reality, otherwise we could dscuss this forever and never get anywhere." Philosophy runs in circles never producing any hard real data, just more philosophical opinions. So, science started attempting to define things, in place of endless debates and opinion came hard data and empirical evidence. Now if such things are the intended products of ones labor it certainly makes senses to try and move beyond our limited five senses, which science does with the instruments I mentioned earlier. Trying to inject philosophy into scientific debate simply confuses and steps beyond the utility of science in the first place.

    5. I am under the "opinion" that the reality we see and feel with our senses may not be what is. The complexity of our vision is the reason why our brain think that the physical reality we see, including ourself is really there. We do not see, we perceive electrical signals in other words, everything is energy, the sights we see are created in the brain, a brain we first saw this same way. Some kind of consciousness in the mind receives electrical signals in the form of an image.
      The hardness of your computer also originates in the brain. The nerves on your fingertips transmit electrical information to the touch center in your brain. And when you "near" a computer, you feel the hardness and intensity of it, all within your brain.

      A quote from Carlos Castaneda describes this in better terms: The reality of our day-to-day life,consists of an endless flow of perceptual interpretations which we have learned to make in common.

      It is the web of human perception that holds this reality together. And as someone mentioned before, it may all disappear in an instant of realization. i have written not long ago...this is my actuality. It is like a bread dough. I shape it, i mold it, it grows, i punch it down, i remold it, it grows again. It is in constant mouvement and it all started when i was very very very young and i do not know when or if it will ever stop.

    6. Az... right, I agree with what you say, except do not agree on anything from Castaneda personally, who was known to fabricate all his stories.
      "BUT" the stuff that he plagiarized from other sources might have some merit.

    7. I don't know where or how Castaneda got his idea, i don't know if Don Juan existed in one person or in many or in his mind. May be when he did drugs he became Don Juan and in this way Don Juan got to exist for him and for millions of people in those days.
      But what i know is that there are a lot of good quotes under the name of Castaneda that can be used and some of those quotes started a mouvement within the mass that has kept growing since then. We have almost forgotten Castaneda but we cannot deny that it opened some doors that were shut tight before his least for many people.

    8. Once again you are trying to apply philosophy to a technical arguement. I may or may not agree with you on such philosphical ponderings as what constitutes reality or existence but, that has nothing to do with the question of whether scientists rely on their five senses to interpret phenomenon. They don't, pure and simple, cut an dry- no ambiguity in that statement. Now if you want to say that we can't even trust our senses to read the data provided by instrumentation, that is a fairly bold, and awefully pessimistic, assessment. I mean we generally trust ourselves to drive vehicles, care for our children, operate heavy machinery, etc. I think we can be trusted to read the instruments we create. We know they are accurate because we have used them repeatedly to measure known properties and check the results against other devices and methods known to work as well. That said if the results they give us will not also plug into the mathematics and make sense, or can not be repeatedly verified by other methods, we ignore it anyway.
      As far as Carlos Castaneda I am afraid you lose much credibility when using him as a source for anything other than entertaining fiction. He is not recognized as a philosopher, credible journalist, important literary figure, or even an ethical writer. He was simply one pop culture figure, amongst hundreds, that posited a new reality during the late sixties with no real proof or philosophical arguement to back his out landish claims. In fact he was discredited by the rest of the literary world as unethical for calling his works true stories then refusing to offer any proof of this. Even if you are going to follow the philosophies of some pop culture personality, which is entirely your business, you could pick a better candidate than Carlos in my opinion.

    9. If our senses fail us and distort reality even in a scientific context, then we would not be capable of building masterpieces of precision like the Large Hadron Collider, Burj Khalifa, The International Space Station, and all the other human creations that only function because of our ability to make measurements that accurately reflect reality.

    10. My point exactly, I couldn't agree with you more.It is Azilda that asserted they couldn't be trusted to even read instruments, not myself. I only assert that they are limited and that we do need the instrumentation.

    11. Haha I was just confirming your point. No bad blood my friend... although this is an internet comment section, so I should really be doing my best to demagogically incite rage and anger. Unfortunately, its not in my nature.

    12. I don't say that we can't trust reading instruments. The physical world is very much alive and the five sense that rest on it, very much here too. I am saying that the physical world may be the yolk while an other dimension may be the albumen, the transparent stuff that surrounds us and that we are not aware of.
      As for the shell....we shell know in due time.

    13. thats like saying "because dukt tape is sticky 100% of the time and always acts like an adhesive, there is no such thing as the soul" apples and oranges my friend

    14. If there was no duct tape the world would be a sad soulless the existence and 100% stickiness of duct tape confirms the existenceof the soul so nenerner

    15. There were no better than Carlos in what Carlos did to the world "at the time". Re-read my comment.
      You extrapolate my words.

    16. your statement is correct, however there is a dogmatic side to science that comes from the status quo of what is accepted. in this way it is not anymore superior than religion now, if we really DID live in an entirely materialistic reality, there would not be anomalies constantly and consistently in all scientific data. second there could not be a quantum world, third any debate would have been won by the 50's and over by now given science' repuation and affect on this world. however this is not the case.there are scientists within each disciple that repeatingly show evidence to the contrary. now does this mean there is a man in the sky going to punish your for eternity? no or a red devil burning your soul alive? no . no religion has incorporated all of what we know into one unified picture of reality that explains science physics math etc. however there is one view that does this, it is that reality is a simluation (video game) we are the charactors consciosness is holding the joystick, quantum is the programming, and the world of the large is the envirnment. the big bang coming out of nothing? things based off fractals? anything we know is possible to fit in this unified view of reality. let me know if there is an alternative view that accounts for everything

    17. That view doesn't account for creation itself... it's like believing in a creator outside of our Universe... and there we go again... believing in a simulated reality... it's the same idea that believing in God... who created the entities that created the simulation? and how can we ever describe they´re world... it rises the same type of questions! you get to an infinite regression all the same.

      In my opinion... reality is circumstantial... and I think it is a word with no exact definition... since it depends entirely in the observer... so it may just be that reality is the sum of everything... like conscientiousness... you can't pinpoint it... it results in the sum of all the parts of the brain functioning in the right way in a environment ... and although we believe that conscientiousness arises in the brain... without a body to interact with the environmental it's hard for conscientiousness to arise at all... we can't describe conscientiousness by dividing the brain and studying it's parts... since it's only when everything is working together that conscientiousness manifests... you can't describe conscientiousness... (at least for now)
      a global picture of everything... might just be to much for us to understand... we gotta consider that possibility... we can't imagine something that it's not related with our own experience... a new shape... a new color... If we get somewhere near a good description of everything it will be exactly that... a description... a model... never reality itself since it has to be translated to human like language... that's why Quantum mechanics it so hard to understand and describe...

      "... if we really DID live in an entirely materialistic reality, there would not be anomalies constantly and consistently in all scientific data. second there could not be a quantum world..."

      I see what you mean... but let me refute this statement... the theory of materialism holds that the only thing that exists is matter or energy; that all things are composed of material and all phenomena (including consciousness) are the result of material interactions. In other words, matter is the only substance, and reality is identical with the actually occurring states of energy and matter.

      I would say that we still don't understand the properties of Matter to say that we live in a materialist world or not... since we tend to see matter has solid... it may happen that the very concept is wrong... and we have to rethink what we mean by matter itself... and that is what Quantum physics is doing it's describing matter in a totally different way of what the original concept describes... it's not that we don't live in a materialistic world... it's that matter isn't quite what we thought it was...

    18. consciousness is the creator one form, it splits off to separate entities(your soul) and those entities participate in simulations to advance their individual consciousness and bring that back to the whole there all your questions are answered. (might just be to much for us to understand... we gotta consider that possibility... we can't imagine something that it's not related with our own experience... a new shape... a new color... If we get somewhere near a good description of everything it will be exactly that... a description... a model... never reality itself since it has to be translated to human like language... that's why Quantum mechanics it so hard to understand and describe...) what your talking about here depends on the individual and if they live a advanced life dedicated to increasing intelligence evry minute of the day or not . so speak for yourself and instead of assuming what people can never know or do advance yourself because as soon as you quadruple your iq or intelligence in a small amount of time it changes your perceptions on man's limitations. i agree with some of your ideas though (not trying to disrespect at all like talking bout things thats all)

    19. I'm not assuming anything... I'm just saying it would be presumptuous of us (humans) not to entertain that possibility... and that we can't understand the whole, by studying the parts... although it is helpful... it's an incomplete process..

      As for the other part (let me put this way) you would have to become an atom... to understand in reality what and how an atom behaves... we can never see through the perspective of the atom... what we can do is create a representation of our observations... a construct... a model that describes it's proprieties and characteristics... this applies for everything else outside the realm of human experience... although I can accept that we might somehow extend human experience and human perception... I think there's a limit to that... I guess you would have to become omnipresent and omnipotent to understand reality... you would have to ascent and become one with the Universe it self... it just seems a little far-fetched to me... but then again... who knows... it just might be possible... in a gazillion years...

      But we've only toke baby steps so far.... we're still bounded to focus on self causing problems. maybe if we can create and implement a system of conscious and equality we may be able to grow, and really try to understand the Universe... has a species I would say we're just out of infancy yet. There's a long journey ahead of us... if we survive that is...

  29. @Sieben Stern That is so cruel, fcking up a lifes of young people, who are 2 naive, 2 young, 2 trusting... " still makes me nauseous and really angry. " same.

  30. realy realy huge peace of "like":) i gues onece it started few years ago, there is no going back:D

  31. at the religion 2.2 part - that jesus camp woman is vile. no matter how many times i see her or hear her talk it still makes me nauseous and really angry.

  32. started slowly but gets better, Ive enjoyed it so far but think it will take me weeks to get through all thirteen hours.

  33. We're enjoying it more and more as the film progresses

  34. money = slavery.

  35. I failed to mention below how impressed I was with their model of education, where the children learn according to their own interests and go at their own pace, a system dedicated to true education and not just training another worker for the assembly line. I have found throughout my college career that if I truly want to understand a subject or concept it is entirely up to me to pursue that knowledge. I do so through the internet, by consulting fellow students or the faculty, whatever I have to do. Sometimes my instructors get frustrated with me because I refuse to simply memorize the steps or some random fact, I insist on relating what I am learning to real world situations. This gets really sticky in higher mathematics and sometimes you do have to wait until a little further down the road before you understand the “why” and not just the “how”. But, eventually you will find the “why” if you really want to know. My point is that this should be promoted by our educational system; it should be “built in” to the curriculum. Instructors should always know the real world application of what they are teaching, and they should continuously relate what they are covering to this application. More than this they should continuously try to inspire children to take charge of their own education, and allow them room to do so. After all when you get to the university no one holds your hand, it is up to you to pursue your education, to organize your life, etc. They should also stop relating the purpose of education to simple earning ability, which they do constantly. Monetary success should not be the motivation for education, curiosity and a better understanding of the world around you as well as your fellow man should be the motivation for education. Most of the scientist that have contributed the big breakthroughs of our times led simple lives; they sacrificed money and comfort in the pursuit of knowledge. Anyway, I am covering the same stuff they do in the documentary at this point so I’ll just refer you there. I think they explain it very well.

  36. While I agree with about ninety percent of what these guys have to say it seems to me that they want to create a world of absolute certainty; one where even the langauge we use everyday is so unambiguous as to require zero interpretation. A world dictated by pure scientific logic. I myself am a chemistry major, and an x-physics major, so I understand and embrace the world of science. That said, I am not sure I want to live in such a dull predictable world. Yes, resources could be managed better, division due to silly superstitions and cultural nonsense could be reduced, etc. etc. But what about imagination, passion, art- what happens to these things in a world of absolutes, a world of no interpretation?

    Think of all of the art, both literary and visual, that came about as a direct result of the diverse cultures that make up the world. Think of all of those that have been inspired by such art to go on and do great things that helped shape the present. They even make documentaries about how pop culture content like star wars or star trek have influenced modern science and helped to bring about many scientific break throughs we now enjoy every day. Literature through out history has been inspired by the social, political, and physical environment of the author. This litrerature then goes on to inspire others to reshape their environment in various ways and the circle contniues on, and on, and on.

    What happens to this cycle in a world run by machines, as per scientific mechanical logic? What happens to empathy, compassion, or the "spontaneous overflow of human emotion". (Wordsworth's definition of poetry.) I am not asserting anything here, I am simply posing a question. What do you guys think?

    1. All of these things are fundamental human needs. Since the purpose of the proposed system is to assure the well being of humans, they are included as factors. It seems to me there would only be more art and more variety thereof in a society based on logic.

    2. i always believed that a system should account to our belief & benefits, in tune with nature ,to maximize our evolution in understanding the questions we impose on ourselves about the ''why's'' & ''what's'' !i know that great art ,to this day, consists of human tribulations & failure,deriving from depravation & pain...but there are great cultural achievements based on happiness & abbundance !if we want to move on the evolutionary scale,we should use our whole potential & that can only blossom if we use our technology wisely,rid ourselves from monetary slavery,invest our knowledge potentionaly in our children & learn to live in balance with our surroundings!the social unity will aspire to higher goals,art & that not what every human wants?

    3. When people have to work less and have more free time to think, they produce more art, more tech, more things that leisure time has always allowed.

  37. Fairly slick presentation and quality. Sadly, that doesn't hide that it's a bunch of sophistry. Slickly packaged drivel. If it takes 20 minutes to even start to do an "Allegory of the Cave" you're not trying to be clear and educate, you're trying to confuse and beguile. If that isn't the case, then you're just plain failing badly.

    Speak clearly and concisely if you want to educate. All the frippery gives me grave misgivings as to the content or the intent.

    Granted, I could only stand 30 minutes of this noise before I had to shut it off.

    1. It's better this way, it takes into account the mental state of the people it is trying to reach. It's trying to ease you in, instead of just smacking you in the face. It is a good general approach.

      Why are you so angry anyway? Are you offended or something? The people who made this film made it for free and they're not forcing anybody to watch it. What exactly is the problem?

    2. That's a fair set of questions Sion.. I'll do my best to answer them. am in fact a bit offended, yes. Not in the sense that, 'this is offensive and should be censored,' but offended that I don't feel that the film makers are being honest. Perhaps they aren't being honest with themselves first, however, so the dishonesty may not be intentional deception, but the deception of one well intentioned convert trying to share his revelation with others. If they advocate clarity and scientific logic, why are they selling their ideas like a religion would sell itself? The choir in the corner, and the all the allegory is counter to their own stated goals. Further, their use of picked and chosen quotes from scientific authority figures (who I don't believe ever gave a direct quote of endorsement) cobbled together in such a way as to give the impression of endorsement is deceptive, regardless of how it's intentioned. Their position would have been much more honest, I feel, with a direct, logical, scientific presentation. And a good deal shorter, I'd wager, with the pertinent content.

      I understand that they aren't forcing anyone to watch it, and I'm happy their opinion is available for others to peruse and consider. But, it has the feel of a mystery cult to me, designed to entice, then once folks are interested, secrets to be shared, dogmatic stories to be digested and analyzed for glimmers of higher truth, and then from thence onward toward salvation and utopia through following the master plan as laid out by the prophets.

      So, that said, I don't think it has a chance of working out as laid out, but if it was going to, it would need the people jumping on board to do so ready to apply rigorous scientific thought to the process, not for those joining the cause to be doing so int he mindset of a new zealous convert.

      In short, sell it as an engineering (social, civil, mechanical, economic, etc) problem and solution, not as a new religion.

      I would hope that everyone watching this applies the same rigors of thought to dissecting this film and it's contents as the film makers want you to direct toward the world currently at large. But I get the impression that the presentation is designed to inspire fervor, discontent, and mistrust with the world at large specifically to create an 'us vs them' mentality in the hopes that viewers don't.

      I hope that sums up exactly my main problem with it as clearly as I can.

      PS: I do agree with a lot of the stated goals, I just feel more could be accomplished, more actual progress made, with a more honest strait forward approach.

    3. Well, thank you for taking the time to reply. The arguments put forth are valid but we're being subjective here. A straightforward approach would be better for you perhaps but there are many more people with whom it just wouldn't work at all because they are too distracted. No doubt you know that to be true.

      It can generally be considered unreasonable to accept any ideology without due consideration. In fact, the message films like this attempt to convey is exactly that, critical thinking.

    4. If you could only stand 30 mins of a 13 hour documentary why would you subject us to your opinion?

  38. I watched the entire thing before messaging .how could anyone disagree with the topic and discussed main objectives? it is covered in a clear and a concise manner and methods discussed are the most efficient available. yet I see disagreements and rebellion in these comments below. It must be a misunderstanding, or not fully understanding the unification of all of it and how it has affected society. the monetary system is clearly based off of corruption. every solution mentioned looks at the problem and actually addresses the problem and does so in a way that is thovee most beneficial to the advancement and development of society. I hope anyone that disagrees goes through and figures out where the misunderstanding lies and corrects it. a resource based economy is the only feasible option and makes the world and people's quality of life the most important aspect .money is slavery I always knew that. car bills , jobs, mortgages, credit card bills on and on is a game of slavery where they feed and house them self why is this not obvious to some? maybe they think if they had more "money" their life would improve. it is a false objective. the world is a Styrofoam garbage can in the current system. we live in a disposable planet with landfill graveyards and invisible prisons in your checkbook 8 out of 10 people hate their job half the world is starving the small fraction of people that have enough to get by have to hoard and isolate. the corporations governments schools and people them it are sociopaths and politics is a soap opera. the evening news is a lie. schools teach you to be a robot and not to question anything. everything presented in this film is correct, however i do disagree with some minor aspects like spirituality but agree within the context that they mentioned also it would be ridiculous to get rid of art as it is creative expression. i hope this system comes into being and replaces the current one. the scientific method applied to society is what this is about. why would anyone not want to get rid of scarcity?

  39. i've watched somany doco's on early human and it never crossed my mind. but this year i have enrolled in uni to study anthropology so these things seem to be coming more to my attention.

  40. That's a very interesting point. Now I'm curious when white people came about. Hating this documentary has proven to be both fun and interesting.

    I also find it interesting how these fools seem to be very focused on understanding humans from a prehistoric evolutionary stand point, but don't look to any pre-industrial cultures to model their ideal society on. Their have been many cultures that do not suffer from the insanities of modern industrial society, but they choose to fixate on an entirely unprecedented and very undemocratic global industrial utopia, dubious in both desirability and feasibility.

  41. why do they always show early homo sapiens as white or mediterrainian looking. i would have thought they would be black. can anyone please give a reason why early homo sapiens had white skin, it goes agianst my common sense knowledge, how can it be?

    1. A worthy question & certainly one that incenses me (not your question but the topic) when I am witness to this ridiculous portrayal of our ancestors. Whether or not you believe this man existed, I suspect it is the same reason why Jesus is often portrayed as a blond blue eyed man.
      I am not supporting either argument for his existence other than the fact that the powers that be; film directors, producers, artists, writers & on & on are exceptionally narrow minded in the larger sense of things.
      Is it based on familiarity in that the authors of such portrayals presume the majority of their viewers are educated & therefore wouldn't otherwise be watching said documentary or appreciating an artistic interpretation of history & by default must certainly be of white western descent?
      Please understand, my tongue is firmly planted in my cheek as I write this & harbour no racist or ill feelings towards any person be they white, yellow, brown, black or even purple. These portrayals of historical people are very sadly short sighted.

  42. This doc is unbearable!

  43. I have an idea for renewable energy: hook up a belt and turbine to every dead science fiction author that tried to warn against techno-dystopia and harness the power of them spinning in their graves.

  44. Watched the whole doc.......It goes from one extreme to the other.
    Some of the things are so good that may prove life changing..... but some of the stuff feels too naive on part of the maker.....

    The best part is the "questions and collapse" do watch it if you don't have the time to watch the whole

  45. Loved it

  46. Pleasant, almost surreal effect from good editing of a myriad clips.Only got as far as the copyright would let me. Lots of social and scientific information weaving through an Utopian underlay. Thank you Vlatko xx

    1. @norlavine,

      You can skip the copyright part.

    2. thank you vlatko for your effort here and running the best doc site anywhere this site makes a massive difference and does not go underappreciated! i have sent at least 20 people here

    3. click youtube logo then in playlist you can watch that one and continue on afterward

  47. There seems to be an established school of thought that if you can just create a documentary that is pretentious enough, independent of any other mechanism of change, that the world will be saved.

    Admittedly, I've not watched the whole 14 hours, but I felt like I had after the first 15 minutes. I skipped past concepts I'm already familiar with. The analysis of the problems of modern society is pretty solid, and I agree with most of the sentiments against non-democratic systems and institutions, but the presentation makes me want to pull my hair out. I can only listen to inspiring background music for so long until the manipulation turns to irritation.

    These techno-topians really try my patience with their half baked and borrowed platitudes. It's like listening to a 16 year old yammering away about how amazing Led Zeppelin is. Carl Sagan, George Carlin and the rest of the commonly quoted figures from this school of documentary had a lot of very amazing things to say. But none of these personalities have any connection to any direct line of causation that would help alleviate the worlds ills beyond helping 1st world college students stave off boredom.

    Theoretical physics and philosophical ruminations on the nature of reality are interesting, but it won't save the world. If you disagree, maybe you should sit down and write or draw your concept of what the connection is between heady documentaries and long term benefit to this dying planet is. Then ask yourself if this is not just another religion promising deliverance if enough believers convince enough non-believers.

    The contradiction is pretty amusing: A doc that spends several hours deconstructing the ill effects of a technosized, regimented and unnatural society, where labor is divorced from reward and the common human is deprived of autonomy that then prescribes an unprecedented level of technological automation, an even further divorce between labor and reward and an environment that makes autonomy obsolete. I'm sure the fish swimming in the poisoned oceans of the world would love nothing more than for you to have your very own star trek replicator.

    1. The goal of this film is to educate, so that technology and science will be used for the benefit of all instead of both being the slaves of profit.

      Documentaries like this will not change the world but they do a good job at conveying a philosophy of reason. The more people they reach, the more impetus there will be in the world for radical change, that's the contribution. It is as real and important as the actual solutions because there won't be any change, until a critical mass of people demands it.

      This is the philosophy of the future, it will take over eventually. It's just a matter of time.

    2. wow,your comment is long & well articulated which proves your mindset as well educated but still ,all you are comunicating is that ''it's **** & won't work,because it ain't happenin' '' !you seem to favour the possibility of change this 'flic' tries to imply but instead of pointing out weak points with positive solutions you prefer to bin the whole concept..........which points straightaway to the weakest point in the concept in ,who fear the loss of comfort more than the loss of dignity !

    3. I caught that contradiction myself. So everything is done for you... and this frees up your mind so you can do something to make your life better... huh?

    4. "I caught that contradiction myself. So everything is done for you... and this frees up your mind so you can do something to make your life better... huh?"

      What's up wpsmithjr!
      I would like to comment on that :) ... what they mean by this, Is you would be free from repetitive dull jobs. You're saying it like we would turn into spoiled little creatures sitting on our asses all day... that's not the point... How many times did you (or someone you know- don't what to assume) said "I wish I could learn, this or do that, but I just can't find the time"... what they mean is people wouldn't have to get up and go to work just to survive... what about arts, and science... exploring, creating... without having to deal with..." I have to , or I'll dye"... there's a lot of wasted human potential, if you have to work just because you need the money to survive... If you think about it... it happens already... you don't have to go and gather food, or water, or shelter, or fabricate clothes, or walk for 1 day to reach the near by city (unfortunately many still do)... there are entities that do that for you already... but you still need money to access them. They're just talking about refining, and improving those processes, freeing man from jobs and tasks that are castrating human potential... that's just the definition of technology in it's true form...

      "Competition and ambition are part of our physiology..."

      You're wrong sorry to say... We're adaptive creatures... we resort to competition when resources are scarce... it's not our "nature"... but it's a powerful weapon we use to survive if we have to... in a scarce environment it's the survival of the fittest... or the wildest... and everything is fair... we are also cooperative creatures... and we're learning that it was that characteristic that made us come this far... we're problem solvers... thinkers... creative beings... you're underestimating all of us. We can challenge ourselves without having to compete with one another... We don´t have to be given things to do... come on we're Humans...!!! There is so much to do and create, and explore and learn... We should be able to live our lives to the fullest without self-imposing (system imposing) problems.

      You can´t look into this idea with the prejudices of our current system... or you'll overlook it's full significance... as for sports... the fundamental base of team sports... it's team work (obvious lol), cooperation. Competition ain't the only reason... yes it's part of it... but there's mastery... self improving... problem solving... health... fiscal and mental stimulation ... and just plain old FUN!!
      Just debating, hope I wasn't to offensive, that was not what I was aiming for.

      Note: this does not mean I agree with everything on the doc


    5. well said

  48. I just stopped it at 13 minutes because the narrator's accent is hard to understand, and made worse by the music in the background competing with her voice - and winning. Since you make me feel like I'm not alone in this, I'll struggle on.

  49. God this is slow.

  50. "strenj coolars, strenj sheps" stopped watching at 37 seconds in, if the narrator removes the appendage from her mouth, I may return. Sorry, but if I have to decipher and mis hear words, I'm not really interested.

    1. That narrator speaks only for first few minutes. I am about a third in to the documentary and it gets more and more interesting as you go along. I recommend it.

    2. @Jeremy check out their site. u can watch the documentary with "robotic voice-over" ;)

  51. 14 hours? Isn't this getting a little rediculous? but I liked the auto tune music. I see more of this in the future.

  52. Zeitgeist movement only describe the problem but no solution, their suggestions sounds like utopia, too bad Venus project broke them off because they only insinuate, while effort is appreciated to advocate awareness not offer fantasy as a form of solution.

    1. Well, your own statement is also just an insinuation. They did indeed offer solutions, a good part of their materials dealt with solutions. They did have collaborating experts giving them suggestions, but of course nothing concretely demonstrable. Do you expect them to do every single thing on their own while you sit on your ass? And yes, it does sound like utopia, because that's what a world of abundance would be, utopia.

      When people say it's not possible, they shoot themselves in the leg. It only serves as approval for this atrocity of a society to continue down the set path. It is possible, all of the goals proposed can be accomplished but it's going to take a long time, possibly a century or several.

      If nothing is done to at least start a slow transition from FREE MARKET -> RESOURCE BASED then it will never happen. We will sooner perish.

    2. HECK YES

    3. There's nothing wrong with the free market as long as you have a government that prevents unfair competition. That is NOT what we have. Also, the problem of mass consumerism and destruction of the environment is not a "free market" problem. It's an EDUCATIONAL and CULTURAL problem that was created on purpose by wealthy industrialists starting in the early 1900's.

      The key is LOCALITY. We need to realize that we don't need to live like kings, and instead live at one with our environment... and to be sustainable at the local level... if we are to survive.

    4. your statement is based on conditioning like mine used to be before i came across the correct information. the reality is that barter and trade are a form of corruption . those type of systems are a lottery where random people end up controlling the entire world through money , corruption is the original idea then barter and money add to it expanding the intial idea. a RBE means no ownership or property the whole world would be yours anything you want would be given to you ( assuming there is a purpose)say you wanted to be a festival promoter you would be given the land the equipment the people the help you organise it and have a festival with 50 bands that public can go to for free where it would be announced that you assembled it so you would get reconition. so there are many things people can't do in a monetary system but if that had the tools and opportunity their real passion could come out people doing what they care about

    5. If you have a worthy cause and want to donate your time or have time to donate you can do all of that now.....but I am all for doing it on a full time basis and having it done in a democratic fashion as well. Like RBE which is essentially a publically "owned" economy the way it should be.

  53. poor choice for a narrator, I dont think I will be able to listen to her speaking for 13 hours

  54. I went in with a sceptical eye as I was instantly disliking the female narrator with a Leeds accent and at 10mins in it seemed to be shaping up like a re-edit of Zeitgeist but...

    Very nice job on the production quality. Some excellent footage and concepts that sit well with me at least! The odd arse-up like the annoying song towards the end of the first science clip and a little patronising in some parts of the narration, but all in all it seems a well put together and broad documentary at 2 hours in. Recommended :D

    - also section 2.2 is missing due to copyright :/ -

    1. there is also a robot-voice overlay. check the site. Btw, the internet prefers if you first watch it, then comment. Otherwise, what is the use?

    2. "Btw, the internet prefers if you first watch it, then comment"

      Hence me watching two hours, then clarifying that the opinion I'd given was based on two hours of viewing... it's a 13 hour+ playlist, If people want to completely ignore the preceding comment because it was based only on the first chunk of the doc then they are welcome to... If people are slightly daunted by the length of the video and want some impressions about its first two hours and what that might suggest for the remaining parts then it exists for people to use or ignore.

      Also, why is the fact that there is an alternate voice overlay have anything to do with the poor aspects of the chosen default narration? And wtf are you talking about, 'the internet prefers' - get a grip and speak for yourself.

    3. Who the hell put a copyright on this?

    4. All3Media according to Youtube... It did seem surprising as it said at the start that it was distributed free^ Although it uses a couple of lengthy clips from other people's work, maybe somebody had issues with the use of their work in that clip.

    5. you can find the missing pieces on the tromsite dot com :3 i think it's under present monetary system - though it would be nice if they numbered the chapters like on youtube.