The Venus Project: Everything Wrong With Utopian Fantasy In 108 Simple Questions.

So, in your ‘humble’ opinion, betterment of the human race is an unrealistic dream and a selfish endeavour? Maybe I see your point… Continuing to spend every human life (not to mention finite planetary resources)securing money and power for the already rich and powerful is a much worthier goal.
Did this article make you feel superior?

I don’t blame you for your ignorant fears, author. it’s not going to take over the world, it might start as a nation, and you can visit, and see how much of an idiot you used to be, but now that you are there, you can learn and grow as a proper human being 🙂 and life will be better. you can still get things you want, you think artists and craftsmen are just going to disappear? there are no rations, but if you want more of something, you probably have to do a little more for it, as much as that will pain you in your 24 hours of free time most days because this world will have no use for you other than your divine influence; freedom to output the ideas of your wildest dreams all day long!!! it sounds horrible… lordie save us!

Its always easy to criticize, but what is your solution George?

I’m a long time advocate for Zeitgeist and a RBE, so I have dealt with a lot of guys like you, but as per usual they never ever ever ever have a viable solution, I’ve looked into many many various other systems with supposed “solutions” only to come up against the same old problems until I found Zeitgeist.

The RBE is the closest I’ve currently seen that we can use, in order to have true equality, a symbiotic relationship with our planet, a system promoting humanity over profit and abundance for all more than any other system or theory on the planet.

I’m very open-minded, give me your solution I’ll genuinely look into it. I’m all ears (eyes really as I’m reading haha!)…..

Unless Peter Joseph has an agenda (which I highly doubt, but it isn’t impossible) and he has hidden a huge flaw in the RBE from us all that not ONE other person has thought of, then I doubt that YOU would be able to challenge him any more than the usual “de-bunkers” until he “de-bunks” your “de-bunks” as per usual. If you actually did further research you’d find all the answers to all of your questions with a satisfactory outcome either from Peter Joseph, Ben McLeish, Jacques Fresco, the Zeitgeist FAQ page or the Zeitgeist forums.

If you do however have questions or have found genuine flaws or holes in the entire THEORY (you are forgetting that it is just that…. a theory) and I will point out that an RBE is being lived by various people around the world as I type this (Look at Earth-ship communities for a very primitive version) then ask away, ask in the forums, ask Peter himself or Ben, I’m sure if you think you’re the one person who has finally found a huge flaw, then as logical and rational thinkers (who thrive on being wrong as it is not equated to failure) then this will be taken on board and considered, if there is no answer and it is a genuine flaw then let me know because I do not want to promote a flawed system either, but until then do research further.

As for every single point you have in the above blog, each one of those points can be answered for with a decent, logical and satisfactory answer, and I for one0 do not have the time or the compassion to answer each and every one of these just for you, the reason I know this, is because I asked many of the same questions or points when I was first learning of the RBE. To my own detriment at the time, I was wrong.

But please George, please give us your incredible solution, and if it’s that incredible and better than the proposal of a RBE, then I apologise in advance for my ignorance and scepticism but until then save your own time and everybody else’s, you’re not special, you’re not THE ONE to disprove an RBE and you are certainly NOT original.

We’ve heard it all before……..

Cynicism at is absolute best! and while I am a “fan” of the venus project, I appreciated the critique, but I was also pissing myself at some of the things you said. Bravo sir.

On a more serious note though, I do believe that some of these things needed saying. Firstly its understandable that people want a better world after all the crap we see on the news everyday how couldn’t anybody imagine a better world. So therefore its equally understandable why people attach themselves to ideologies like TVP without giving it any real thought as to how things will be run, how you get things, the logistics and time required to transition from here to there (without just adding a ‘t’), and these are some of the questions i asked when I found TVP on-line as I was wallowing under the pressures of the current capitalist system.

Capitalism is awful, it promotes materialism and selfishness, it creates a system where success is measured by your next promotion or your bank balance and people go to extreme lengths (especially those less fortunate) to get that success, raconteuring, extortion, theft, blackmail and these activities go all the way to the top of governments. But you sit there and twiddle your fingers until you come across like minded people who also want to make change which is what TVP is just people wanting to make a difference with similar opinions, I wouldn’t go as far as describing it as a cult.

I openly admit TVP is not perfect, i’m not naive and think that these things are just going to fall into place and everybody will be like ” yeh that’s cool, i’m happy with that”, JF just had a few good ideas that we all know wouldn’t be beyond the reach of human technological capabilities and that could (if implemented in the right way) make the world a better place. However as you stated JF was not a psychologist and he didn’t have a clue about how you change the mindset of billions of people who have thousands of years of capitalism embedded into their history, its impossible. So the way you do it is change the reward system.

So money is the reward, however it is earned by most people out of purely selfish goals. What if we changed it and instead of rewarding individuals for helping themselves why not reward people for the amount they help others or the environment. You are rewarded just like money and you can spend that like you would normal money. Except the principle is that you earn while you improve the world around you. The idea is a principle called copiosis (www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZRy9fP041k, have a little watch ) which I found through a guy on TVP.

We don’t actually need money, economics has made this virtual system which is so fragile that it destroys the lives of millions of people in seconds, its all to do with rich greedy people moving their money around from one account to the other looking for personal gain. We see people dying all over the world as the rich with-hold resource and wealth from the poor. No one has the right to say you can’t eat or drink, everyone is born with a right to food and water, and when its beyond their control to obtain you start to ask questions. But let me add i am not blaming the rich i am blaming the systems although many of the worlds problems could be solved if the rich were a little more charitable.

whilst these ideas may not come into fruition any time soon it is always good to challenge the system if it can be better, but change is slow. Technological change is rapid however social change is the limiting factor, best thing everyone can doe at this moment in time is start making little difference. a little stone can make big ripples you just got to throw it in.

Apologies for the essay, Peace x

From what I see, the one big division factor of this argument, is the debate over human nature. Over the argument that once Humanity has everything it needs, the ugly side of humanity like greed, racism, violence and exploitation will be a thing of the past, or are things like violence and greed inherent in all people, and are just suppressible? These are the questions that we need answers to.

Plus people seem to think this is a plan that wants to be realized overnight, but this end game is simply a goal. I mean, it’s foolish to think that you could eliminate money overnight. It’s going to start with small baby steps, namely as of right now Bernie Sanders. Getting money out of politics. Downsizing the military and stop exacerbating the wound that is the Middle East. Start eliminating fossil fuel dependance, and promote green Energy across the world. I mean if something like the Venus Project is to be realized, it’s going to take baby steps. And I’m not really sure where you’re coming from with this babies born outside the womb raised by robots talk, But in a future where ideally people are significantly more intelligent and educated, and there’s no more domestic violence and abuse, I believe parents could easily be trusted to raise their children. And as to the thought of conditioning, well conditioning is something that has always been used, and always will be used. Like right now, the United States is conditioned to fear Muslims. Because of 9/11 and the war on terror, Islam is considered the enemy to America. That’s conditioning. The ruthless exploitation of African Americans as slaves for hundreds of years, in the white man’s other lack of empathy, that was conditioning. The conditioning doesn’t necessarily have to be a bad thing, you can condition people that hurting people is wrong, that judging someone based on the color of their skin or eyes is wrong, that wanting more than you need is wrong, that hurting animals is wrong. All in all, this is all just total conjecture and hypothesis and theory. The first true test of the theory of the Venus Project, would be to have an experiment with 100 or so children, taken from all spectrums of life, all nationalities, happy parents, gay parents, parents with mental illnesses, parents that were violent offenders, even one or two parents that may be a serial killer, or a rapist. And the goal would be to raise these children exactly the same, in identical conditions and see if some developmental conditions like schizophrenia or psychosis or ADHD or multiple personality disorder appear without a trigger, see if any exhibit signs of greed, or racism. See how sexual orientation affects children’s lives in the same environment. And seriously just do some in-depth psychological tests to see what makes humans human. To see if you take a hundred kids from different spectrums of life and raise them the same, will they grow up to be the same? It would be foolish to think that there would be no individuality, but would there be evidence of the crippling human conditions that we have in our society? Or are the crippling aspects of human nature caused by a society that doesn’t care enough about its people, that allows terrible things to happen to children? I don’t know, and you don’t either. I feel it’s an important psychological test that needs to be done. Finally try to answer the nature vs nurture argument. One last Point against your criticisms, automation obviously couldn’t occur overnight. But most certainly the vast majority of jobs could be eliminated in a few short years with automation. We will still need engineers and scientists, biologists and chemists, to run the day-to-day operations. But over time, less and less workers will be needed, as automation technology catches up with the more advanced roles needed like doctors and nurses, construction work and gardening. It would be a revolution of baby steps. The time it would take to get to a final working model, could be several lifetimes. I would be willing to work towards this though, because I refuse to work towards the exploitation of this planet anymore. Things have to change in this world, and soon. Otherwise, be it global warming or World War 3, it will be too late to save us from ourselves.

Dear Author,

You used no evidence, only opinions. Science is based on empirical data, not opinions. Technology is created through science, not opinions. You’re a dumbass is my opinion, and it doesn’t change the fact that you used “it just isn’t” as an explanation for your claim of why science is incapable of solving the worlds problems, which has no validity because of your lack of empirical data.

You say its all about Jacque Fresco in The Venus Project, but ideas are fluid. The logicality of Fresco actually coming up with it all on his own is ridiculous. Perhaps there are so may pictures of him because he died and had a dream this would help people. Is that so terrible? To want to help people?

You need to work on your argument.

P. S. You’re not comical, just an arrogant asshole.

Fresco is one man, trying to solve a series of global problems. It is evident he is not going to be able to design every single aspect of this new society to the smallest detail. As such, of course a lot of things are left to be designed and thought of. That being said, he certainly takes MAJOR steps in the right direction. A resource based economy is the only way to go, humanity has reached a technological know-how that pretty much guarantees we will eventually nuke each other for access to resources. That only happens because there are many entities (countries) with conflicting interests. If we had one entity to manage everything, that would be absurdly more effective and peacefull. The monetary system IS BROKEN by default. It relies on population growth and economic growth to function. That will colapse soon because there can be no infinite growth within a finite system. technology MUST play a crucial role in solving our problems because it is often the most effective, comprehensive and repeatable way. This man is trying to solve these and other issues in the best way he can by designing a detailed alternative, and in my opinion it is by far the best one so far and far better than what we have today. Does it have flaws? of course! Does it have the right mentality to tackle those flaws and other difficulties? hell yeah! I mean did you expect this project to be flawless? there is no way it could!! Can anyone tell me in what way our modern society is better than the one Fresco proposes?? (answers like “i can own a Bugatti if i work hard enough and want one” are stupid because that same system that allows you to have a Bugatti makes thousands of homeless and starving people.) The answers for the question I just made must take into account all the facets of the systems that allow for the advantage you are describing, they must weigh pros and cons. I mean, what does the writer suggest? that we should strive to maintain this broken system that fuels inequality, suffering and conflict?? if not, provide some alternatives, give suggestions instead of cheaply criticizing the best attempt that has been made so far to solve many serious problems with a comprehensive system that considers them all.

This is just someone’s ego (fears) looking for attention. Very poor, shameful analysis.
And this guy “Charlie” is another stupid and fearful person that can’t or don’t want to understand how we use the Scientific Method to arrive to decisions instead of making the decision, that is why he always ask ‘who’ will make them. And if you don’t understand the method you will never understand TVP.
Very irresposable actitud of both of you for future generations.

I am sorry. I find Jacque Fresco very appealing to common sense and rationality. Your article is full of ‘proof by assertion’ logical fallacies.

I am, honestly, a supporter of Fresco and Joseph. They do see a better way for humanity. Not a Utopian society, without some individuals that doesn’t fit in. Venus Project may sound utopian, but I’d rather support that, than the corruption of humans in “Oh, so perfect and wonderful monetary system.”
I am an individual, quite capable of thinking on my own.
Are there flaws in the “resource-based economy”? Of course, it’s thought up by A HUMAN BEING!! This is still a far better way of managing humanities basic needs.
What I see (and this is PURELY my own eyes looking at the word):
Personal wealth is creating an ever widening gap, between the 1% (who sits on 90% of the wealth) and the rest of us. I see humans working hard, to never be able to pay their debts from education. I see a few forcing they way onto others and using brute force (police, army, etc.) to keep the wealth in the hands of the priviliged. I see far to many people being stepped on, ground down and even punished, for not thinking $$$$$$$$ and MEMEMEMEMEMEMEME!
Segregation, alienation and indoctrination happens all over the world and even more so in the western world. Oh, and education… Let’s get a lifetime of debt, for a promise of never having to worry about finances again.
I see despair, hopelessness and the dominion of the few truly EVIL humans. Human nature is not that of egoism, it’s not that of Kill-or-be-killed. I see alot of people who WANT to do what they can to help, but most aren’t able to do anything, because they fight against a gian, wich will NOT go down without a fight. It is NOT in our nature to be greedy, it’s something we learn from parents, friends at school and so on.
If mankind doesn’t find a better way, we will see 1929 again, only x10 worse or more.

Now, I still see alot of issues with Zeitgeist and Venus Project. The first is Josephs antics on Jesus, the way religion is portrayed is not accurate, but Joseph based these notions on others he trusted or believed in. It should be fairly common knowledge by now, that these statements are made by a man angry at the dogmatised religions of today. Hell, I may even have a much better way of explaining why Jesus might really be a myth. In any case, I don’t believe in God or Jesus, as portrayed by ANY man.
But there are many good points that is shown, even here. Some seem rational, others not so much. But taking into account that humans 2000 years ago thought differently than us, there just might be some hints of what MIGHT have happend on Dec. 25th year-3 (or thereabouts). But a faith in something beyond our understanding and far beyond or comprehension, can be a comforting thing. When you start to prech “your truth” others, forcing them to into YOUR way of belief, then religion becomes dangerous and no religion has more blood on it’s hands, than catholosism and christianity. No, not even jihadists have had enough time to soak their “holy word” in more blood.
But that aside, I’m not here to “debunk” anything.
And still, I am supporter of Fresco and Joseph both. They both see massive issues with our current way of thinking and acting, undersatanding that WE, as a species, has to change our way or WE will end up killing humantiy and Earth.

And not a single person have been able to fully debunk the idea of a resource based system. Because it always comes back to: “So, what do _I_ get out of this?” or “So, who will pay for this?” and honestly, as long as those 2 questions pops up, nothing will change.
Because to many people CAN NOT see past: MEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEME!!!!!

It’s so sad to see intellegent, reasonable and rational thinking humans not even trying to work on solving our social issues and only talk trash.

Whatever it means, I will cry out: REVOLUTION!!! until the day I die. And not for Utopia and not for any single individual, but a revolution of mankinds depraved, sick and morally bankrupt mindset.

Oh, and for those interested in a debate/discussion, my name is Leif M Falck and you can easily find on FB 🙂

Great post. I’d good to see an opposing argument. However, just because someone, or some idea, has it’s flaws and quirks or obvious fallacies, does not mean that it should be thrown out the window. I have followed the Venus Project for quite some time, and even though I do believe it has some undoings, that does not mean that it is all incorrect. We, as the next generation of thinkers, should take his ideas and expand and innovate on them. In fact, Jacque believed this as well. I’ve heard him say many times over quotes like “The Venus Project isn’t the solution for everything.” or “This plan may not be complete.” or “This plan is not a utopia, it’s just better than what he have now.” or “Don’t build a statue of me” (that last quote being a metaphor to that fact that his ideas will someday be of no use to a more advanced society). The thing is, many people love to throw the ideas of someone who is evil, crazy, etc. out the window. But, although I cannot confirm this, Hitler, Mao, Stalin, Nixon, Trump (who ever you think is evil) probably have had great and wonderful ideas that would surely make a better place for everyone!

I do believe that he was on a path to a future society that would be much better than the one we have today. And I think that instead of providing a full critique of someones ideas, we should provide at minimum an alternative, and at maximum or own improvement. Otherwise, the critique was for nothing.

I do mean this with the highest of regards and respect. I’d rather not have a trivial duel of slander and correctness.