Skeptic Project

I've noticed a lot of parallels between the ex-Workers collective "CrimethInc" (CWC) and The Zeitgeist Movement. Both have over idealistic goals, but seem to think the best way to bring them about is to drop out of society and contribute as little as possible.

There are some differences though. TZM puts out crappy videos and audio, where as CWC puts out books and articles. To CWC's credit, a lot of interesting ideas are published and many are actually useful, but there's plenty of bullshit like opposing modern science and promoting essentially caveman-like behavior, that turn me off fairly quickly.

CWC has an article called "Your politics are boring as fuck" and I link it to TZM members fairly often, as I think it shows many of the short comings of TZM and why nobody will give a shit about them. Unfortunately CWC isn't really any better. Both come from the perspective of largely white, middle class, western, young males who believe they know what's best for the rest of the world, and think they can make it happen with wishful thinking.

Unlike CWC, TZM does absolutely nothing, and I think this is a lesson they can learn from CWC. While CWC is essentially the same idealistic, pseudointellectual masturbation that TZM is, at least they do something, where as TZM does nothing at all. What do they do? They protest, create squat houses, and all kinds of things, but of course none of it brings us any closer to the workers revolution. Dressing in shitty clothes, living in a shanty, and eating out of a dumpster is no more revolutionary than wearing shitty clothes, living in a basement, and eating burger king while posting on a forum. But hey, at least CWC members are going outdoors.

As many of you know, I was raised in an Anarchist family and I was privy to witness all of the craziness the New Left had to offer America post-Vietnam War. It really disenchanted me with not only the left but also liberalism. I didn't sell out and go to the right, but really I just gave up thinking that anything worth a shit could be accomplished. I didn't vote for Obama, and as I said to most people before the election "Even if he wins, he'll just cop out and not bring about change, Bill Clinton promised all of these same things in 1992."

TZM, CWC, et al have failed to learn from their (and the New Left in general's) basic failures in capturing the hearts and minds of the people. Interestingly enough, the modern "Tea Party" movement, while I disagree with 99% of what these people say, I find it interesting how they've been able to get so many people behind them. It's really unfortunate that while the Tea Party really has not accomplished any goals (probably because they don't have any clear set goals other than lower taxes) they've still done more than TZM, CWC, Not In Our Name, Communist Party USA, Anarchist People of Color, etc etc etc have done combined in the last 25 years.

I've seen this stuff time and time again, TZM is absolutely nothing new, but they are essentially a part of the New Left, except they're not activists -- unless you honestly count handing out DVDs as activism.

In this topic, I'd like to discuss, compare and contrast, and analyze not only TZM's place in modern politics, but also their position in the New Left. I'd also like to include why you, the reader, think that the New Right has gained more success, not only here in the US but also in Europe (though not as much) -- please be specific.

This isn't to be a discussion on whether or not Leftist politics are right or wrong, or whether or not TZM's overall beliefs are right or wrong, but just a discussion about them in general -- though you can include how you feel about them just so everyone knows where you stand. Please try to stay on topic, I don't want this to turn into 25 pages of why TZM rocks and why we just don't get it, like the Zeitgeist Movement discussion thread did.

Yup, I've been thinking in a similar direction when it comes to Neo-Socialists waiting for some kind of world revolution vs. TZM waiting for the collapse.

The old parole "campaign, campaign, campaign" exhibits almost the same never-ending trust those TZMers have in "raising awareness" and "shifting values".

If they would actually succeed with these ideals, I'd expect them to be closer to authoritarian Leninism than anything we'd call anarchy, like Makhno in the Ukraine.

But, as they still rely heavily on conspiracies or simply semi-religious nonsense (capitalism is going to collapse, because capitalism "demands" growth), the whole success part seems just as improbable as a sudden socialist world revolution.

I haven't looked into the tea parties, though. Maybe their members are just less scattered and the movement thus more visible for nonmembers. It's kinda hard to even notice TZM if you're not actually looking for it.

I meant the broader Tea Party movement.

In a broad sense I think the New Left has failed largely because they've become irrelevant--society has generally been moving in a progressive direction since the 60s, and the platforms of the New Left that had appeal to mainstream people have largely been co-opted by the existing power structure.

Example: feminism. There were a lot of radical feminist groups running around in the late 60s and early 70s, as well as some more mainstream ones like NOW. In 1968 it was new and noteworthy to take the position that women are the equals of men and should have equal access to wages, education, careers etc. Today very few people in the US, Canada, Europe etc. would dispute this position. The radical feminists who wanted to go around literally destroying men, like Valerie Solanas, were always fringe, but their fringe beliefs were built on top of an essentially rational progressive idea. What I mean by that is that if mainstream feminism was, "women are the equal of men," and radical feminism was "woman are the equals of men" + "women are better than men" + "all men must die," when the basis idea, "women are the equal of men," becomes mainstream, all that's left is the radical shit that nobody but nutjobs believes in. So, groups that have this ideology lose followers and die off.

I see TZM as pretty much the same. Radical ideology built on top of essentially rational progressive ideas. If the progressive rational part of TZM's platform is "let's increase economic equality" and "let's save the environment," the radical add-ons are "let's have computers rule the world." Well, today, most people in the mainstream believe on some level that economic equality should be increased and that the environment should be respected, so TZM is nothing new where that's concerned. All the new stuff they do offer is the radical shit that has no chance of mainstream acceptance.

The New Right has been more successful and more visible because they oppose the basic rational progressive ideas. They don't want economic equality, gender equality or respect for the environment. They want to turn the clock back to 1899. Consequently, their adherents are more unified and energized because they're opposing not just the radical fringe groups on the left, but the progressive tendencies of the mainstream. Naturally they're going to be noisier, more well-organized and more well-funded.

Ironically, the New Right is more successful because their position has less acceptance in mainstream society than the New Left does--they're more successful because they're losing the argument.

This has nothing to do with the political stripe of leaders in power. Since 1968 in the United States we've had 6 terms of conservative presidents as opposed to 3 terms (3 1/2 if you count Obama) of progressives. Yet, American society has been moving pretty much inexorably in a progressive direction. Nixon, a conservative, created the EPA and proposed national health care. Reagan, a conservative, essentially negotiated an end to the Cold War. Bush I expanded anti-discrimination to people with disabilities, Bush II expanded Medicare, Clinton reformed welfare, etc. Society is becoming more progressive, not more conservative. The New Left is irrelevant, and the New Right is doomed because they're trying to stuff the genie back into the bottle.

TZM is pretty insignificant compared to all of this.

I agree, great post Muertos. I feel the same way, sort of like how certain groups such as Anarchist People of Color still think that black people can't vote. Jesse Jackson also still thinks it's 1962. I find it stupid (for lack of a better word) how simple problems/racism/sexism/etc turn into massive requirements for radical ideas from the perspective of old hats like Jesse Jackson.

Hold on off purchasing your tubs of survival seeds folks.

Armageddon is unlikely.

lol you read Fox News.

Figures.

You're stupid. Go work on your electric car. Add some parabolic dishes or something.