I looked over the list of warning signs and considered doing a much longer post about this, but I realized it really was not necessary. So I am going to go over a few key points.

1. One of the reasons for the confusion over what our organization is is because we state that we are not a "political movement". But in practice we are a political activist organization in the same context as Green Peace, Veterans for Peace, etc. We advocate an economic model designed for ecological sustainability. Not a religion, superstition, etc. (In fact a lot of our members are atheists.) We suggest people use the scientific method to test ways of fixing the world's problems rather then relying on politics or superstition.

2. Activity as far as membership in TZM consists of signing up for a mailing list. Optionally chatting on forums or using voice chat. (The vast majority of people signed up for the newsletter and mailing list do not do this.). We attend public events to try and engage in dialog about our ideas in the same way other activist groups do. Some groups of people have meetings in person to talk about this stuff but they are not secret cabal meetings in forests or something. In fact most of them are in public places like libraries and such, again like most activist groups. If someone "leaves" the group it would actually probably go completely unnoticed. If someone was friends with a given member they might inquire as to why they didn't see their friend at a meeting but there is no protocol suggested or even implied that we would go track people down and try to guilt trip them into attending meetings again. And removing yourself from our email list is as easy as it is for any other activist organization.

3. Peter Joseph does not paste his personal information and his financial records everywhere. And while I can understand why this is often a concern with a given organization, there are no "membership dues". He gives away all of his films on the internet for free, including files to allow you to make your own DVDs. If people buy DVDs from him it's generally because they don't know how to burn them themselves. He could easily charge $20 for these and he only asks for $5. He sells T-shirts but he is not making a killing on them. And in fact spends a lot more money on this activism then he ever gets out of it. To say nothing for the hours of his time he puts into making activist films. There are hundreds of indy film makers who do the same, but make a hell of a lot more money then he is. Michael Moore comes to mind.

4. There is no "abuse" going on. I have challenged Mr. Wish to produce any sort of evidence of "abuse". He seems really fixated on our internet forums and not much else. He uses a lot of language like insinuating that people could die, get hurt, or their "blood" could be on someone's hands and to be blunt, this is all really silly. The vast majority of the interaction that people have in the Zeitgeist movement goes on in public places or on the internet. Nobody is being molested, sexually harassed, intimidated, or mentally abused. And when he came to our forums and made that broad and vague accusation of "abuse" even users who are critical of our moderation team because they are anarchists philosophically and wish we didn't have moderators still came forward and told him he was being unreasonable.

5. The first Zeitgeist film did contain a lot of stuff about conspiracy theories. But it was put together by Peter when he was in college as a music major. It was part of an artistic presentation he did and never really expected it to be anything special. The most controversial portion about religion was based on a book he read by an author named Acharya S. and was not his own research. But he was an atheist so he liked it and included it. Some people liked it and suggested he put it on the internet. He never expected it to get the following that it did. This said, when he made that film he had no idea what a Resource Based Economy was, or who Jacque Fresco was. He stumbled across the idea when he was looking for solutions to the perceived problems he saw in the world that he talked about in the film. Jacque Fresco and the Venus Project do not endorse the first film. And belief in conspiracy theories is by no means required to support the ideas Fresco presents. You will notice there are no conspiracy theories presented in the orientation guide. And while some members still watch the first Zeitgeist film it is not relevant to anything we spend time talking to people about.

6. With the advent of the internet there are a lot of cultural factors as far as to what the internet is still being ironed out. If you own a given website it is fully within your rights to set rules for how it will be used by other people. Just as you are within your rights to set rules for what topics you don't want talked about in your house. We run into new territory when people do not agree with things being said on a given website. But the analogy I came to realize applied better was this: Imagine you have decided to have a civil rights meeting at your house. A racist comes over and starts to disrupt the meeting and is very clearly not in support of the purpose of the meeting. So the owner of the home asks the person to leave. That is what goes on when we ask someone to leave our forum. It is meant to be a meeting place to talk to other people interested in the same topic. None of us would ever advocate censorship of dissent elsewhere. Just as it is the right of that racist to go to the street corner and protest our civil rights meeting if that is what he wants to do. Some of us have taken action against people who's "dissent" includes what amounts to little more then cyber-bullying and harassment. But that is done on an individual basis and not the organization as a whole.

In conclusion:

I would hope that the people who frequent this forum while being concerned about cults would also be concerned about the kind of damage you can do to well meaning organizations by labeling them cults too quickly. I would ask you to think very critically of what it is your reading about the Zeitgeist movement and be skeptical of the other side of the argument as well. Internet harassment of different organizations is becoming more and more common. And words like "cult" are extremely easy to abuse. You may not agree with the political views of the Zeitgeist movement but that does not make it a cult. And I hope you also realize that the internet is full of angry people making unfounded allegations towards one group or another that they feel has done them wrong, or just to amuse themselves. And that is what is going on here. I found out about this conversation because one of the people who does this just to amuse himself (including taking people's personal photos, their personal information and warping them to engage in schoolyard mocking behavior) had the link posted on one of his websites. In other words, they are hoping you will label us a cult not because anyone is being hurt or is in any danger, but because they would get the same sadistic pleasure they do when they photoshop pictures of members of our family to humiliate them out of this. You will notice if you study it further that most of these people are also just as concentrated on people who have moderated them on the forums.

[thezeitgeistmovements.wordpress.com]

This page is an example of the kind of childish cyber-bullying i am talking about. You will notice the endless mentioning of my weight, and very little in the way of intellectual content. At one point he posted a video of me and my three year old son playing together to insinuate my son was stupid. This is the kind of harassment I might add that is the reason we have anonymous moderators. This person spends a great deal of time in their life doing this. And chases us all around the internet doing things of a similar intellectual value. And it is people like him that is where this "cult" business started.

While I do feel we need to be concerned about people being hijacked into "cults". I would also caution people to be equally concerned that they might also be hijacked in the lynching of innocent organizations that just angered someone who is behaving petty who might use your efforts for their own amusement. I keep thinking of "the crucible" and how in Salem a girl who felt scorned used the Christian religion to get back at her "enemies".



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 03/04/2011 02:10AM by rrmoderator.

Not sure why that got posted in it's own thread. It was meant for the thread about the Zeitgeist movement. Sorry for the confusion.

[ni4d-issues.rbefoundation.com]

absolute proof that there is abuse. VTV is an ad hominem junkie and uses an ad hominem double standard to troll his own forum.

Banning you from an internet forum is not abuse.

As stated in the other response, the conditions under which i was banned absolutely prove cult abuse.

Prometheuspan:

See [www.culteducation.com]

Defining a Cult

* Isn't the word "cult" a pejorative label used to discriminate against new religious movements?

No. It is disingenuous to ignore the historical significance and modern day applications of the word cult. Today many controversial groups, that have been called "cults", are seeking to either eliminate the word, or create through fear of litigation a reluctance to use the term. Some cult apologists have literally said that "'cult' is a four letter word," and should be replaced by the politically correct title "new religious movement" (NRM). However, historically cults have always been with us and they continue to be a part of the world today.

* How is the word "cult" defined?

Webster's Dictionary defines a cult as:

"1. A formal religious veneration 2. A system of religious beliefs and rituals also its body of adherents; 3. A religion regarded as "unorthodox or spurious."; 4. A system for the cure of disease based on dogma set forth by its promulgator; 5. a: A great devotion to a person, idea, thing; esp.: such devotion regarded as a literary or intellectual fad, b: A usually small circle of persons united by devotion or allegiance to an artistic or intellectual movement or figure."

This definition obviously could include everything from Barbie collectors to old "Deadheads," "Trekkies" to diehard Elvis fans. American history might also include within such a definition the devoted followers of Mary Baker Eddy the founder of Christian Science, or the Mormons united through their devotion to Joseph Smith. Both these religious groups were once largely regarded as "unorthodox or spurious." However, the most important concern today is not simply who might be somewhat "cultic" in their devotion now or historically, but what groups might represent potential problems regarding personal or public safety. That is, groups that are potentially unsafe and/or destructive.

Psychiatrist Robert Jay Lifton, who wrote the definitive book about thought reform (often called "brainwashing") also wrote a paper about cult formation. Lifton defined a cult as having the following three characteristics:

1. A charismatic leader, who increasingly becomes an object of worship as the general principles that may have originally sustained the group lose power.

2. A process [is in use] call[ed] coercive persuasion or thought reform.

3. Economic, sexual, and other exploitation of group members by the leader and the ruling coterie.

How do you feel this group fits these criteria?

I know this for Prometheuspan, but I would like to give it shot to see if I understand correctly.


1. A charismatic leader, who increasingly becomes an object of worship as the general principles that may have originally sustained the group lose power.

Jacques Fresco is such a charismatic leader. On his web page for the Venus Project, it is specifically noted that, “The Zeitgeist Movement is the activist arm of The Venus Project”. Clearly, these are one and the same. Throughout their movie, Moving Forward, they state that transparency is important. They also state they believe in, the scientific method, a resource base economy, and that all people are entitled to the fruits of the earth or some inherent right of birth. I forget exactly what they call it. They also say they believe those that lack morals and ethics are brain damaged.

The general principals have lost power in the actual movement.

Transparency, which they say would have stopped certain bad economic issues from occurring, is not present when they themselves are questioned. In fact, it is difficult to have any sort of conversation within the group to peruse transparency. They privately control the only reasonable medium to effectively to speak to the entire group at the same time. If they make a mistake, they have been known to delete and hide the offending material pointing to their lack of transparency.

They state that the scientific method, something not of opinion, is to be used to direct their goals. I have found that they have little expertise in the scientific method and that it is not deployed to solve internal situations within TVP/TZM. Given the amount of name calling and fighting between members, no one had deployed or requested the help of those in science known to have an education in social sciences. As a result, the claim of the scientific method has become something that is a lost principal.

The idea of a resource base economy sounds great up front. Yet, when people try to find a way to get there, it is your resources that are being requested and they give nothing back, but unanswered questions of how to actually accomplish it.

They do not allow equal voice in discussion and thus, prove themselves hypocritical in the equality of us all.

Their choices to ban people from their forums when they themselves are in the wrong is ethically and morally wrong. So all the talk they make about us being the result of our environment is not practiced with any positive result on their own turf, in many instances.


2. A process [is in use] call[ed] coercive persuasion or thought reform.

Many of those that have asked hard questions and disagree are told that they do not understand the movement. They are told they must read and watch more. Their legitimate issues and questions are not addressed, but instead, told they are confused. If they object, they risk being kicked out.

3. Economic, sexual, and other exploitation of group members by the leader and the ruling coterie.

They ask for donations of time, equipment, expertise, money and do not clearly state the inner workings of their financial system. I point to the BOINC project and D-Wave, that they support, trying to make a sale to Google, using the resources of TZM members personal computers, as proof. Others have noted that there are at least three different company names involved in The Venus Project alone and that the current membership is unaware of what is in these financials.

I look forward to reading Prometheuspan's reply.
Thank you.

Quote
DavidWish
I know this for Prometheuspan, but I would like to give it shot to see if I understand correctly.


1. A charismatic leader, who increasingly becomes an object of worship as the general principles that may have originally sustained the group lose power.

Jacques Fresco is such a charismatic leader. On his web page for the Venus Project, it is specifically noted that, “The Zeitgeist Movement is the activist arm of The Venus Project”. Clearly, these are one and the same.

This is one of the reasons I find the cult distinction to be problematic. By this guilt by association logic your using here people could of said that Martin Luther King or Ghandi were cult leaders. Where is the distinction drawn between an activist leader and a cult leader? As I pointed out in my own article about cults the definition alone can be stretched to apply to anything if you are not careful. Jacque Fresco does have admirers but that does not automatically make him a cult leader. It is possible that individuals may take their admiration of him too far but that is true of public figures all over the world. And it is not the fault of a person who did not solicit that level of devotion. The Virginia Tech shooter listed a Megatdeth song as one of his inspirations, this did not make Dave Mustaine a cult leader, or in any way liable for his behavior. You might say that he doesn't have a movement, but Megadeth does have a fan club. So that could also be construed as his "movement". This is what I feel is being done here. Cults are dangerous but misusing the term is equally dangerous.

Quote
David
Throughout their movie, Moving Forward, they state that transparency is important. They also state they believe in, the scientific method, a resource base economy, and that all people are entitled to the fruits of the earth or some inherent right of birth. I forget exactly what they call it. They also say they believe those that lack morals and ethics are brain damaged.

Transparency is important. But that does not have to include the moderators on the forum. As demonstrated by the fact that this forum itself has anonymous moderators.

As for the discussion about the resources of the earth being a birthright, it is not unusual for systems of economics or government to make distinctions about that. "We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal" is a statement along that line. It doesn't make the people of the United States a cult. Different economic systems have different views on this topic. And yes, we like many behavioral scientists (like the ones at the begining of Z3) do feel that violent behavior is a result of environmental conditioning to the brain. This is not a metaphysical or religious belief. It is based in science. You may not agree with it. But that does not make us a cult.

Quote
David
The general principals have lost power in the actual movement.

Transparency, which they say would have stopped certain bad economic issues from occurring, is not present when they themselves are questioned. In fact, it is difficult to have any sort of conversation within the group to peruse transparency. They privately control the only reasonable medium to effectively to speak to the entire group at the same time. If they make a mistake, they have been known to delete and hide the offending material pointing to their lack of transparency.

All of our meetings are recorded and archived. They are publicly attend-able by anyone using the Team Speak service that nobody charges you for. This as far as the national level. The meetings of the movement itself take place in public places almost always. Usually public libraries. And are also open to the public. There are many mediums for people to communicate with us on so your statement is incorrect. The reason the forums have rules is because we have found that people with their own agendas can and will waste enormous amounts of our time derailing topics. I again use the analogy of someone holding a civil rights meeting, and a racist arrives and starts de-railing the meeting and making it unproductive. If the person owns the building the meeting is taking place in he has every right to ask people to leave. Your statements accusing us of being a cult were refuted more then once. You based them entirely on the idea that we had anonymous moderators and were not plastering our personal and financial information everywhere. You suggested that we were abusive solely for the way we operate our forums. And then you went on with appeal to fear fallacies suggesting people could be hurt, or killed based on the way we use our forums. It was utterly preposterous. And when it was clear you were not going to do anything but spam already refuted points, you were banned. Not because we are some super secret cabal. But because conversing you was clearly becoming a waste of time. I would point out that membership on the forum is NOT required to read it. So again, transparency.

I also gave our very solid reasoning for anonymous moderators. And that is that internet trolls can and will engage in harassment campaigns for their own amusement. They are not doing this out of any concern for anyone. They do it for their own fun. And so we protect ourselves from that just as people on MANY forums with anonymous moderators including this one do.

Also, the forums are not even a way to address the whole membership as not even a fraction of the over all membership even use the forum. This is another reason why I feel your fixation on the behavior of the forums being the sole proof that we are somehow abusing people in the organization is silly. Participation on the forums is completely voluntary.

Quote
David
They state that the scientific method, something not of opinion, is to be used to direct their goals. I have found that they have little expertise in the scientific method and that it is not deployed to solve internal situations within TVP/TZM. Given the amount of name calling and fighting between members, no one had deployed or requested the help of those in science known to have an education in social sciences. As a result, the claim of the scientific method has become something that is a lost principal.

I also feel this statement is entirely false. If there was some super scientific method to prevent trolling that would be different. There isn't. We do set up rules and ask people to follow them. Your claims of rampant name calling and all that are also completely untrue. We have rules against it and we have been asking people to understand why such behavior is wrong. The culture of the forums themselves is actually rather peaceful most of the time. We go for months without banning anyone.

Quote
David
The idea of a resource base economy sounds great up front. Yet, when people try to find a way to get there, it is your resources that are being requested and they give nothing back, but unanswered questions of how to actually accomplish it.

This again, is not true at all. There are no membership dues in the Zeitgeist movement. There is no charge for participating or using any of our mediums. Any donations are given freely and with no obligation. And what they are used for is obvious. Nobody is ever coerced or manipulated into donating. And in fact Peter really avoids asking for money at all. If people wish to buy his DVD's he offers them at 5 bucks when he could easily charge far more then that. And gives away all of the content on the DVD's ABSOLUTELY FREE including the ISO burn file to just make them yourself. Peter has spent far more money on this then he will ever make back from it.

Quote
David
They do not allow equal voice in discussion and thus, prove themselves hypocritical in the equality of us all.

Again, completely untrue. There are rules on the forum just as there are rules on this one. Anyone can join the Teamspeak server and talk to us though again if your going to spend your whole time derailing our conversations eventually you will be asked to leave. This is only reasonable. And is true everywhere that I have ever seen. If someone has a forum for a specific purpose then it is clear that derailing conversations about that purpose is going to be a problem. See again the analogy of the meeting I suggested above.

Quote
David
Their choices to ban people from their forums when they themselves are in the wrong is ethically and morally wrong. So all the talk they make about us being the result of our environment is not practiced with any positive result on their own turf, in many instances.

Hogwash. It's his forum. Just like this is Mr. Ross's forum. He has every right to set rules for it's use just as you have every right not to use it. It would actually be immoral of you to insist that he allow you to use his forum any way you wish. And that is basically the attitude I am seeing here. "You better let me talk on your forum any way I want to, or I will just run around the internet calling you a cult." Which is the ultimatum you offered here.

Quote
David
2. A process [is in use] call[ed] coercive persuasion or thought reform.

Many of those that have asked hard questions and disagree are told that they do not understand the movement. They are told they must read and watch more. Their legitimate issues and questions are not addressed, but instead, told they are confused. If they object, they risk being kicked out.

The reason for the test is that we found ourselves wasting huge amounts of time answering the same questions over and over again that people could of easily got the answers for by reading the FAQ. It is not unreasonable to set a standard for people doing research before they come to our forums starting threads in all capital letters talking about how our ideas are flawed when they don't even understand them. I also feel your claims that the issues are "legit" requires more burden of proof. These situations are looked at on a case by case basis. We had a guy on our TS3 server for about seven hours talking to him about his concerns. If we were the evil regime your talking about we would of banned him right away. It did eventually become clear he was just repeating himself in a filibuster, and then started insulting people so we banned him. I don't apologize for that. And it was not abuse to him to remove him.

Quote
David
3. Economic, sexual, and other exploitation of group members by the leader and the ruling coterie.

They ask for donations of time, equipment, expertise, money and do not clearly state the inner workings of their financial system. I point to the BOINC project and D-Wave, that they support, trying to make a sale to Google, using the resources of TZM members personal computers, as proof. Others have noted that there are at least three different company names involved in The Venus Project alone and that the current membership is unaware of what is in these financials.

Already been over the donation issue. I would have to look at the BOINC project and the D-wave project but as I understand it these are both independent projects that are not being run by the Venus Project or TZM itself. People are allowed to do their own projects because we are not in fact some evil coercive element. We just ask people not to ask for donations on the forums. (Yes, ironically that is one of our rules.) And are very specific about what projects people can ask for donations for. I would challenge you to find anywhere on our website where some aggressive donations request campaign is. I get emails constantly from "Campaign for Liberty" and in every email they are asking for money. I have yet to get an email from TZM ever asking for my money for anything. And I have been there since the start.

Quote
David
I look forward to reading Prometheuspan's reply.
Thank you.

[/quote]

I still find it dubious that your fixations are almost identical to his. I would be interested to know if your IP address and "his" are the same. But that aside, I will give you the benefit of the doubt and stick to refuting your points. Which I just did.

As Mr. Ross pointed out, cult abuse is defined by things like the Branch Davidians, Heaven's Gate, Scientology, do to their membership. And I have yet to hear anyone claim they were "abused" by being banned from an internet forum.

I will also take this moment to point out that the same "Campaign for Liberty" group I get emails from asks for donations for their activism all the time. I have yet to get a financial report from them as to what they do with the donations they get. They don't have that information posted all over their site either. And they are not a cult.

Again, our organization is an activist organization. In the same thread as groups like Green Peace. We do not hold any religious doctrine. There is no abuse taking place. And the more I debate your points the more I get the feeling that this is someone who has the same agenda as some of the people we have banned ironically for being abusive to us. They are certainly monitoring and bragging about what is taking place here:

This is the cyber-stalking/harassment/bullying that has resulted just because of these conversations alone. And proof that there are people with an interest in doing just this:

[thezeitgeistmovements.wordpress.com]

[thezeitgeistmovements.wordpress.com]

I also have screenshots of Prometheus Pan who is now participating on this forum pointing out that his entire reason for calling us a cult was to get revenge on me for banning him from the website. And he made it clear he was going to come here and that my only way of stopping him was to get on my knees and beg forgiveness.

If you want an idea as to what sort of person he is ask him how many textbooks he has read, what his IQ is, and about his experiences with astral projection.

You can see some of his harassment here: [www.facebook.com]

There is an effort right now to try and hijack this forum to be used as a tool to defame The Zeitgeist Movement by a small group of people who are angry that their abusive behavior was not tolerated and that for that they were removed from an internet forum.

Not long ago they tried to do the same thing by creating fake "Anonymous" accounts on youtube in the hopes that they could turn that group of internet activists against us as well.

Honestly I wish this was more complicated then that. But at the end of the day this is just a petty feud. And I find it disgusting that people are cheapening the very real suffering that some people have felt at the hands of cults all so they can get attention for their displeasure at being banned from an internet forum.

I have also seen a disturbing tendency in the debate here to just use google and find as many negative articles about TZM as possible in an effort to try and claim it was an "investigation". If you put "TZM is a cult" into google you will find it. If you put "TZM is not a cult" you will find it. The internet is full of useful information but it is also full of noise. And I often see people linking to blogs done by anonymous people on the internet as "proof". I could go write on my blog right now that this forum was a tool for an abusive evil cult. That alone would not make it true. Are you seeing any articles about how we are actually abusing anyone? No. Your not. There are people calling it "abusive" but they are saying that banning people from a forum is abusive, and that is absurd.

Quote
VTV

Quote
DavidWish
I know this for Prometheuspan, but I would like to give it shot to see if I understand correctly.

1. A charismatic leader, who increasingly becomes an object of worship as the general principles that may have originally sustained the group lose power.

Jacques Fresco is such a charismatic leader. On his web page for the Venus Project, it is specifically noted that, “The Zeitgeist Movement is the activist arm of The Venus Project”. Clearly, these are one and the same.

This is one of the reasons I find the cult distinction to be problematic. By this guilt by association logic your using here people could of said that Martin Luther King or Ghandi were cult leaders. Where is the distinction drawn between an activist leader and a cult leader?

I was answering the stated reasons in
[www.culteducation.com]
regarding psychiatrist's Robert Jay Lifton’s book about thought reform.

Make no mistake about it. We are not associating your group by any casually chosen definition of the word “cult”. In your case, the word is abuse. Pure and simple. Yes, your group is a cult, but is a “certain” kind of one. An “abusive” one with thought reform. So, not let us mix words here. I say, “you have chosen” or “can somehow do not understand”, and that you are a danger to the yourself and the human race. Is that clear enough for you? I do not believe you should even see your children until you get help. Is that better? Go to the hospital and get some help.

“Where is the distinction drawn?” The answer is in the question Neil. The distinction is in “thought reform.” That is the test we are taking and we are going to take that test whether you like it or not! For some reason you do not see the distinction. We are trying to make a new distinction base on this test. We will answer the questions and then, if true, you are involved in thought reform. The one that is not involved in thought reform is going to look better Neil, but we have to get there. The answer to question 1. is yes. and reasons were stated. You went on with this:

Quote
VTV
As I pointed out in my own article about cults the definition alone can be stretched to apply to anything if you are not careful. Jacque Fresco does have admirers but that does not automatically make him a cult leader. It is possible that individuals may take their admiration of him too far but that is true of public figures all over the world. And it is not the fault of a person who did not solicit that level of devotion. The Virginia Tech shooter listed a Megatdeth song as one of his inspirations, this did not make Dave Mustaine a cult leader, or in any way liable for his behavior. You might say that he doesn't have a movement, but Megadeth does have a fan club. So that could also be construed as his "movement". This is what I feel is being done here. Cults are dangerous but misusing the term is equally dangerous.

You responded, “As I pointed out in my own article about cults the definition alone can be stretched to apply to anything if you are not careful”

We are being careful Neil. That is why I am taking this test. I like this test. It seems like a very reasonable test. I like to be able to test things. I think it is scientific to take “this” test. This a short test by a really smart person. My hunch is that he did all he could to make it easy and short to get to the heart of the matter. He has an education, a degree, experience, success and nothing to gain from me, except gratitude and respect. The reason we are talking this test is to see if you and others at TZM are using thought reform abuse on the other members.

My response to the original question presented by Rick Ross was answered completely and correctly. It is possible to be shifted away from the meaning of that paragraph. Neil says that, “This is one of the reasons I find the cult distinction to be problematic.”

He is saying here, what? That he find’s Robert Jay Lifton’s test about, “thought reform”, “problematic”. He must either address the original question or he is incapable of addressing the question. I believe he is incapable of addressing the question and needs some help. I am not calling him crazy, but I am not saying the help he can, or may get, will help him. I am saying everyone is worth a shot at getting better. He appears to me to be incapable of seeing that what we are concerned about is strictly abuse, thought reform and other kinds of abuse, and not semantics. He asks for specifics and then cannot maintain their value and the answer provided. As result, he lies again and again. He talks at people, instead of with people.

The bottom line is that we are talking about thought reform. This is easily accomplished by those with any sort of education in the area on unsuspecting people. It is so easy that many people do it without even realizing they are doing it. Thought reform is very dangerous and should be left to professionals with ethics. We must learn when and how it occurs and learn to take this test honestly and practice it by adding it our own tools for proper communication and protection.

The question was simple:
A charismatic leader, who increasingly becomes an object of worship as the general principles that may have originally sustained the group lose power
I answered the question with this:
Jacques Fresco is such a charismatic leader. On his web page for the Venus Project, it is specifically noted that, “The Zeitgeist Movement is the activist arm of The Venus Project”. Clearly, these are one and the same.

And he said,”By this guilt by association logic”. He is incapable of seeing the totality of all the different problematic association’s TZM is involved with. He is not taking into account that we are talking about thought reform abuse. It has already become semantics for him. He does not get that we do not care about all the things he can think about. We should not be more concerned for his thought process than our own. We are talking about thought reform abuse and how it deployed, how to avoid it, and how to deal with it.

We are worried that TZM is deploying an abusive tactic called thought reform. We are not talking about all the other forums with moderators out there. We realize some of the forums that have anonymous moderators are indeed abusive cults and some are not. We realize that after excessive complaints and facts are presented concerning “abuse”, this is a point where complete transparency must occur. As we dug deeper, we found many red flags on transparency within this group concerning finances, donations, words of no leaders and the truth that there are leaders and directors.

All we are doing is following guidelines of a professional dealing with the abuse of people’s minds, through thought reform. The test was simple.

Understand this Neil
You and TZM failed the test.

I quoted you saying you don’t like the test, but I do not care if you do.
Your choices are lying and brainwashing. That means you need help and that no one should listen to anything you have to say until you have been given a clean bill of health.

Pack your bags and go to the hospital. They will try to help you. I caution you. As soon as some daddy out there looses his little girl to your BS, he may come knocking if he sees you refused to get help. And then what? Another Waco?

You cannot go around messing with people’s heads after it is has been proven you are. People may not tolerate it and act responsibly and within the law when they see how callously you dismiss messing people’s heads.
You are done.
Understand your position.
You may not lead anyone, but yourself right to a doctor.

The actual facts that are posted on the other thread:
[forum.culteducation.com]
That is quite an archive of facts, data, events, comments, opinions, discussion, and links.

I see deception.

I only care about each person that considers TZM. I want them to understand that I have taken Lifton’s test and believe this is a dangerous thought reforming movement.

This test was also on the first page of the longer thread, posted by corboy.
[www.culteducation.com]

There is a lot of research on the main thread. Others, who are much more skilled than I, seem to think it deserves that much documentation. That is a lot of hard work and dedication. Some people will clearly be helped as a result.