Skeptic Project

I have to wonder if the bias against TZM is making folks look for ways that they are a cult, rather than objectively looking at the issue. It seems like y'all are trying to hammer a square peg into a round hole in this case.

Now, I'm not saying TZM doesn't suck balls, because it does. Its a retarded bunch of conspiracy clowns and moonbats. But if TZM is a cult then so are Alex Jones listeners.

TZM has cult-like aspects. I have said if they were to get a city going I would raise some concerns. To call them a cult now is a stretch.

@Agent Matt I think their needs to me more academic studies done on internet cults before we can call Desteni or TZM a internet cult as defined by academic however with the information we do have if one were to label them a internet cult or not I wouldn't fault them.

But this is precisely my sticking point. My third year research project was on the ontologies of Internet/Biological life. Now, there was a huge body of literature I couldn't deal with in 10 weeks, but I did feel like I got a better grasp on the possibility of such meaningful divisions. The point here is that you have to rest on an "if then" scenario with TZM. But TZM's control is so limited to internet personas that they are incapable of making that breach over to totalitarian control over the biological individual. People who adopt "TZM" in real life do so individually and through their own interpretations, not under direct control of the leaders. But online, there is a definite deferment to the group "experts" like PJ and an explicit and implicit authoritarian control over their cyberspace. Because TZM has not exhibited this leap from internet personas to biological personas I find fault with them being a cult outright.

I absolutely agree with that. However going by what you say you haven't proven how Desteni's biological self is controlled by their internet persona. Although it may be obvious to most I'd just like your input on it.

Because TZM has not exhibited this leap from internet personas to biological personas I find fault with them being a cult outright.

I think it's hard to say. I may need a definition or your thoughts on what biological persona exactly are in respect to correlating with internet personas. Then by using Desetni which is in my opinion another internet based cult give examples of how they have biological personas based off their internet personas. From what I understand though it sounds like your saying Desenti puts words to action and TZM does not.

I absolutely agree with that. However going by what you say you haven't proven how Desteni's biological self is controlled. Although it may be obvious to most I'd just like your input on it.

The ranch in south africa for one, as well as the creepy videos of people shaving their heads. Its clear these people are firmly in full belief of the desteni doctrine and affect their own bodies to live in accordance to its tenets. That's pretty serious

Form what I understand though it sounds like your saying Desenti puts words to action and TZM does not.

That's pretty accurate in general. Desteni has actually shown it has one uniform way it wants its members to behave and many have done just that. TZM wants an abstract, society wide system but does not implement a group level control in accordance with that.

Drop some acid and think about the future man, dance like a robot to the psytrance music.

I don't buy the "Trekkies" argument. There is no pretense among Star Trek fans that there's any sort of leadership structure, it's certainly not an authoritarian society, and I can't see how anyone could argue they use psychological coercion on their members. So, I think "well, if TZM is a cult then Trekkies are too" is a pretty silly argument.

Why I think that argument has appeal is a false equivalence between Star Trek fandom and Peter Joseph movie fandom. It's false because Star Trek never purported to be true and the people who are fans of Star Trek don't believe it's literal truth. Peter Merola asserted the Zeitgeist movies as literal truth and his "fans" (if you want to use that term) believe they are literal truth.

If a geek dresses up as a Klingon to go to a convention, yeah that's weird but I see nothing cult-like about it. It's not like he's doing it to say, "Hey, I think Planet Klingon [I don't know what it's called in the show] is a real place, and I think we should all live there and become Klingons!" This is a far cry from a Zeitgeister who goes around passing out Merola's movies on DVD because he believes Merola is telling "the truth" and we should pattern our society on Peter Merola's plans.

Star Trek has a "cult following" but its not a system of control that demands people to dress up like a Klingon and subordinate themselves to the system. TZM doesnt deman people do anything, just believe in something. Destini has both to a greater degree.

So what's the difference between them and TZM? Alex Jones followers believe in an evil NWO that has to be resisted, TZM believes in an evil money system that has to be changed (that also sometimes is the NWO but dont tell anyone cause they arent a conspiracy movement).

I don't buy the "Trekkies" argument. There is no pretense among Star Trek fans that there's any sort of leadership structure

http://i56.tinypic.com/23kt5ps.jpg" />

Kaiser, conspiracy theorists and Alex Jones fans are not, by my analysis, automatically cults. For one thing there is no concept of "membership" either in the ranks of AJ fandom or belief in conspiracy theories. Cults are organizations, which automatically means there is a concept of "membership," either you're in or you're out. This concept is lacking with AJ, CT's in general or even Star Trek.

I like Star Trek. I own some DVDs of the old series and a couple of the movies. Am I a "member" of a Star Trek "cult"? I don't see how, because there's no dividing line between being "inside" or "outside" of a circle of some type.

Let's look at my criteria again.

1. It uses psychological coercion to recruit, indoctrinate and retain its members.
2. It forms an elitist totalitarian society.
3. Its founder/leader is self-appointed, dogmatic, messianic, not accountable and has charisma.
4. It believes 'the end justifies the means' in order to solicit funds and recruit people.
5. Its wealth does not benefit its members or society.

With AJ, criteria 1 cannot be met because there's no concept of "membership." He arguably uses psychological coercion by lying to people, but he isn't inducing them to become a member of anything.

I don't see how criteria 2 is met either. There's no "society" in the sense of belonging to a group, like there is with TZM, Desteni, Scientology, Moonies etc.

The other three criteria are arguable in the case of AJ (certainly the last one is applicable no matter how you slice it), but again I don't see it for Star Trek or for conspiracy theorizing in general.

I disagree. I think Clambake's definition is perfectly valid and is consistent with the expert definitions that you and others have used here. Is it the ONLY valid definition? Of course not, and I never said it was. I don't see it as being at odds with any of the expert work on the subject of cults, and JimJesus did not point out that it was.

Alex Jones is a individual and not a group and is purely opinion based individual. If you disagree with him it's perfectly ok as he accepts opposing view points without getting off the ban hammer TZM however does not allow for opposing viewpoints that conflict with Peter's sensitive and artistic ideology/worldview.

I think your main concern is that I didn't put Alex Jones under the same cult criteria of TZM but the thing is TZM is a movement Alex Jones is one person therefore I'm not sure I could evaluate him as a individual on a cult criteria scale so I didn't but if I could I wouldn't do it because I do not think he fits it. I do invite you to put Alex Jones under some-type of cult criteria if you want to evaluate him and his following since you were the one posing the question as to if Alex Jones is a cult or not.

Kaiser Alex Jones enemies list doesn't consist of nobodies like TZM does but also I see no where in AJ's site where he stickies the enemies list and actively says to blacklist them if you see them like TZM does. You could be communist and in a cult but communism is a term used to describe a ideology same as cult is used to describe something.

TZM members do embrace Peter all the time even calling him a hero when in fact all he does is make movies based on conspiracy theory's.

As for the "global" nature of TZM, that really doesnt fit the definition of a cult per se as things like religions and political movements are also global in many regards.

I agree with that just because a entity releases something on a global level doesn't mean it's a cult and it was never my intention to suggest that. In TZM case it's pure propaganda to promote conspiracy theories, half truths, and just pure garbage in a attempt to scare people into joining their cult.

I would disagree that TZM fits number 2 of your criteria. Sure you'd get kicked off the forums if you have disagreements with VTV. However you can still be involved in local chapters, Facebook groups, and other events and thus still be in the 'cult.'

Let's put this in perspective.

On a continuum of 1 to 100, with 1 being clearly not cult-like in any way and 100 being the picture-perfect example of a cult that hits every factor of every known definition, the dividing line between "cult" and "not a cult" is not exactly clear.

The Rotary Club is at 1. The Manson Family is at 100. Desteni is at 85.

Maybe TZM hovers somewhere in the 50 range. Clearly it's very close to one side of the "cult"/"not a cult" line.

We're arguing about whether the line is at 48, 51 or 53 and which side of it TZM falls on. But I think we're all agreed we're at least talking about the same general ballpark.

If TZM is a cult, it is probably just barely a cult.
If TZM is not a cult, it probably isn't too far away from one.

I think that's the take-home lesson here.

[awaits snide response from Matt]

I've been stalked, harassed, slandered and libeled both online and offline by cults. If TZM does this, they're amateur at best. Writing a few blog post calling you a troll is one thing. Let me know when a Zeitard writes an article about you being a crack and cat poop smoking sexual deviant.

People in cults suffer psychological coercion. Meaning, they use systematic methods of psychological techniques that are known to put the brain in lower states of awareness or 'trance states.' Be it though hypnotic rituals (such as extended meditation, chanting, dancing...etc.) drugs, or covert hypnosis (i.e. Dianetic auditing.) I'm not seeing this with TZM.