Skeptic Project

Where did he demonstrate that Clambake's definition is fundamentally inconsistent with the others that have been listed here?

Is it a slam-dunk that TZM is a cult? No, it's not. It's definitely arguable. Under some factors used to evaluate cults, is TZM something other than a cult? Yes, clearly so. Are those conclusions supportable? Yes.

I'm just making the opposite case. Clambake's definition is not expert and it's definitely shorthand. Is it definitive? No, and I never said it was. I think that because TZM is an Internet-based organization, the strict cult definitions developed through study of non-Internet cults means there's a sort of gray area where the strict academic definitions have not yet caught up with reality. That's why I'm not sold on the other cult definitions as totally definitive, and why I think that, with respect to Internet cults, Clambake's definition is workable.

My position is supportable. You may not believe it to be the correct one, but I don't see how it's necessarily faulty.

I buy it. I just don't think Clambake's criteria or research can fully encompass internet cults until more academic research is produced to suggest that cults can originate on the internet. Therefore trying to evaluate internet groups like Desteni and and TZM to fit into a cult criteria is possible but is lacking the necessary research to have solid ground on until more information is gathered so it's like what Matt said it's trying to put a square peg in a round hole.

I agree that Desteni and TZM are a cult but their still needs to be more information gathered to be even more credible on a academic level.

@ Jim to be truthful with you mate I've had numerous articles written about me by their members on their forums, on blogs and a lot of which totally demonised and fabricated things about me. They also provided personal details of some family members on their blogs that were nothing to do with me which seemed a little fucking disturbed. Same for the girl who initially ran the blog with me, in fact the posts scared the shit out of her and she quit talking about TZM in public out of being frightened for her safety.

Not only that there are members who actually fit that criteria, they take drugs and are into new age and mysticism in a big way, granted its not the dogma of the TZM membership in totality, but its there if you take a look on their forum. There are lots of DMT/Acid/Ketamine/Ecstacy abusing members who claim it helps enlighten and awaken people to the NWO/other side or whatever it is they believe.

Anti, It's not institutionalized. That's the difference. If I go out eat some MDMA and blow up a church tomorrow, does that make CS a terrorist cult? No.

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.'

@JimJesus I'm not sure why don't you put them under the cult criteria and find out. Political parties represent the will of the people. People can have differences in opinion and still get a long. As far as I know political parties don't have enemy lists that just compete with other political parties to get votes.

1 Milieu Control. - Nope, they regularly read each others stuff and critique it regularly.
2. Mystical Manipulation - Nope.
3. The Demand for Purity - Maybie in the Republican party if you stretch the definition, but nope.
4. The Cult of Confession - Nope.
5. Aura of Sacred Science - Maybe.
6. Loading the Language - Loading the questions, perhaps. But no.
7. Doctrine over Person - Maybe republicans, but no.
8. Dispensed Existence - Not, really no

I'm not defending it, Anti. I'm saying just because a group is so committed to their cause that some of them make death threats doesn't make it a cult. Otherwise you'd have to agree that every political party is a cult.

@JimJesus I'd agree with that. Cults encompass more than just death threats to be called a cult.

@Anticultist

I'm not saying theyre a cult because of it, but when they do it and then their leadeship..VTV and Tanktop also get involved and publish the material themselves on their forum/blogs and link to it all you dont see a problem with this ?

How then can you say this is not a problem with the group if their leadership condone it ?

This is kind of like patting people on the back for committing some kind of shady duty against critics.

I agree these individuals are manipulative authoritarian individuals who leech or benefit from TZM but they are only one aspect of many as to why I think TZM is a cult.

ALL CAPS RANTS..haha

In that case if a cult threatens your life you should have no problems I guess too. Interesting stance to take Jim :s

And I thought I failed at grasping internet sarcasm. :S

Quit lying you know you love Ed.

THIS ^^^

Jaques little estate is the product of a scam, for sure, and maybe TZM was more like a cult during their union to TVP, but I think thats a moot point now.

You have forgotten about Zday and the Zeitgeist media festival, two events where TZMers meet up. Both events where Peter will be doing lectures. One should take into consideration TZM teamspeak 3 being the "new" virtual compound where TZMers can meet up and chat with like minded people 24/7 about conspiracy theories, hear Peter lecture, and anything else but like I said their are no academic journals that would show research or suggest that the internet can facilitate a cult based purely on the internet until more research is done, peer reviewed by credible academics in their given fields, and published.

Now, if PJ came out and finally, once and for all, codified a direct hierarchy and expelled anyone who wasnt a zealot and who would absolutely submit 100% to anything he said, that would be a cult.

It's pretty much in TZM rules to expel anyone that is not a member of the movement.

Global Communication Site Rules (Forum/Wiki/IRC/VOIP)

Purpose:
The Zeitgeist Movement's Forum, IRC and Voice Chat are made available, for free, for Members of The Movement to share ideas. The term Member is defined as: A person who supports a social group and shares common values and initiatives. Please understand that this is not an "open-forum" environment and that these communication mediums are not intended for the expressions of any persons other than those who support The Movement and communicate in the context of issues related. While constructive criticism - with positive intent - is always welcome, it should be respectful of The Movement and its Users at all times. The definition of respectful lies with the judgment of the Moderators and Administrators based on the interpretation of our rules, etiquette and guidelines (see below).

http://www.thezeitgeistmovement.com/joomla/index.php?option=com_kunena&func=rules&Itemid=100121&lang=en

TZM has banned people who it defines are "against the movement". Peter has even called groups outside of his realm such as CS members mentally ill as well as society as a whole. I don't think society is mentally ill maybe a few people but not society to make such a claim and make others believe it is ludicrous. People who say such things are in themselves disconnected from reality.

But, as pointed out, such banishments are not systemic. You can lose forum privileges but stay a chapter member.

I've heard of people getting banned off one chat medium and then that means there globally banned off all communication mediums of TZM.

Y'all are all bitches.