Zeitgeist: The Movie, Myths, and Motivations

The Internet movie Zeitgeist uses flagrant dishonesty to make an ideological point that could have easily been made ethically.

Filed under Conspiracies, Religion

Skeptoid #196
March 09, 2010
Podcast transcript | Listen | Subscribe
Bookmark and Share

Today we're going to point the skeptical eye at one of the most popular Internet phenomena from the last couple of years: Zeitgeist, a freely downloadable documentary movie. It purports to critically examine Christianity, the cause of 9/11, and the world economy. Instead, it paints them all with a single wide stroke of the conspiracy paintbrush. "Zeitgeist" is a German word meaning the spirit of the times, thus Zeitgeist the movie purports to pull aside the curtain and reveal the true nature of the world in which we live. The problem with the film, as has been roundly pointed out by academics worldwide, is that many of the conspiratorial claims and historical references are outright fictional inventions. Zeitgeist does have a message that's not necessarily invalid, but it's lost underneath the unequivocal dishonesty.

For a long time, people have been asking me to do a Skeptoid episode about Zeitgeist. I've resisted, mainly because it's so poorly researched that I didn't feel it deserved any response from legitimate science journalism. But people have kept asking. And, obviously, a lot of viewers have been swayed by it. I've even had people who innocently bought into it write me and quote Zeitgeist as an authority, suggesting I do some episode promoting one of its claims. Zeitgeist, and the 9/11 conspiracy movie Loose Change, are largely what motivated me to produce Here Be Dragons, my free 40-minute video giving a general introduction to applied critical thinking, which I felt was a more appropriate response than publicly acknowledging either film. But I spent some time learning more about Zeitgeist, its sequels and related events, and its creator, and concluded that the mainstream criticism of the film doesn't tell the whole story, and its worldwide impact does make it deserving of a more critical examination.

Understanding Zeitgeist means understanding its creator, Peter Joseph Merola, a young musician, artist, and freelance film editor living in New York City, at last account. I've found no reference to any educational or professional experience pertaining to any of the subjects covered in the movie. He moved to New York in order to attend art school. That appears to be the extent of his qualifications to teach history and political science, but of course it doesn't make him wrong. It may, however, explain why many of his factual claims contradict what anyone can learn from any textbook on religious history or political science.

Merola made a second film, Zeitgeist: Addendum which offers much better insight into the man and his motivations for creating Zeitgeist. He's basically a postmodern utopian, who spends most of his effort speaking out against money-based economics. He advocates the rejection of government, profit, banking, and civil infrastructure: basically, the "establishment". Once you understand where he's coming from, it makes it a lot easier to understand why he made Zeitgeist and tried so hard to point out the corruption and evils of the establishment. The problem is that he simply made up a bunch of crap to drive his point, and that's where he crossed the line between philosophical advocacy and unethical propaganda.

Much of what makes Zeitgeist popular is that the sustainable utopia he describes is very compelling. It's probably not very realistic, but it's alluring at an organic level. Mistrust of the establishment has been a popular theme ever since a caveman first raised a club, so the two combine to make the message of Zeitgeist appealing, at some level, to nearly everyone. For example, in his sequel, Merola profiles futurist Jacque Fresco who envisions what he calls a "resource-based economy", a world without money where the Earth's natural resources are freely available to all and responsibly managed through public virtue and high technology. This is a fine idea, and while its practicality and workability can certainly be debated, it's perfectly valid as a philosophy. And so, it was from this utopian perspective that the young idealist Peter Joseph Merola set out to first convince us that our current system is fundamentally broken.

He began in the first of Zeitgeist's three chapters with an assault on Christianity. The film draws many parallels between the Nativity story and pagan sun worship and astrology, suggesting that their origins are all the same. This is followed by an impressive set of similarities between the life of Jesus and the life of Horus, the Egyptian god — similarities far too extensive to be simple coincidences. And then, taking key points from the life of Jesus (the virgin birth, December 25th, a resurrection after three days, and so on), we find that the same elements are found in the stories of many other gods from diverse cultures, namely the Phrygian Attis, the Indian Krishna, the Greek Dionysus, and the Persian Mithra. Merola's presentation is compelling, and constitutes a convincing argument that Christianity is just one of many branches of mythology stemming from the same ancient stories going all the way back to prehistoric sun worship.

Where this compelling presentation breaks down is, well, almost everywhere. The majority of Merola's assertions are flagrantly wrong, as if he had begun with a conclusion, and worked backwards making up facts that would get him there. He gave no sources, but it turns out that most of these same claims about other gods having the same details as the Jesus stories come from a 1999 book called The Christ Conspiracy: The Greatest Story Ever Sold. Christian scholars in particular have been highly critical of Merola's unresearched and wrong assertions, which is understandable given that they are probably the best authorities on religious histories.

Part II of the movie depicts the 9/11 attacks as having been perpetrated by the American government, essentially repeating the same basic charges found throughout the 9/11 "truth" community. These charges fall into two basic categories: innuendo and misinformation. Innuendo like the Bushes knew the bin Ladens, the alleged hijackers have since been found to be alive and well, the inexperienced pilot couldn't have hit the building; and misinformation like straw man arguments mischaracterizing what we all watched that day. These, and many other tactics claimed by the "truthers" to be evidence that the attack was an inside job, have been thoroughly addressed elsewhere and I'm not going to go into them here. In short, searching for alternative possible motivations, and finding and making extraneous connections between various people and events, does not prove or serve as evidence of anything. Raising the specter of doubts or alternate possibilities is very effective in distracting people away from the facts, as we saw so dramatically in O. J. Simpson's murder acquittal, and as we see throughout the 9/11 "truth" movement.

According to a New York Times interview with Peter Joseph Merola in which he was asked about the 9/11 conspiracy claims made in Zeitgeist, he says he has since "moved away from" these beliefs. While it's great that he was willing to come out publicly and say that he's abandoned one line of irrational thinking, to me it says more that he leaves it in the movie anyway (Zeitgeist has gone through a number of revisions, and he's had ample opportunity to edit out sections he no longer believes). This is only speculation on my part, of course, but I'd guess he leaves it in because it so dramatically illustrates the evils of the establishment, which is a pillar of his philosophy. If true, it would show that the content of Merola's films are driven more by ideology than by fact.

$2/mo $5/mo $10/mo One time

That this is Merola's ideology is most impactfully illustrated in part III of Zeitgeist. This asserts the existence of what Merola believes is a worldwide conspiracy of international bankers, who are directly responsible for causing all wars in the past century as a way to earn profits. From his student art studio, Merola purports to have uncovered plans, known only to a select few of these hypothesized bankers, to combine the currencies of Canada, the United States, and Mexico into a single denomination called the Amero, as a next step toward an eventual one world government. In fact, the Amero was proposed in a couple of books: in 1999 by Canadian economist Herb Grubel in The Case for the Amero, and in 2001 by political science professor Robert Pastor in Toward a North American Community. The number of economists not proposing an Amero is much larger. This chapter of Zeitgeist goes into great detail, most annoyingly in the way it quote-mines everyone from Thomas Jefferson to Carl Sagan (from letters both real and counterfeit) to suggest that leaders in government and science have always known about this. People knowledgeable in this subject have gone through Zeitgeist point-by-point and refuted each and every one of its dishonest claims, none more effectively than Edward Winston on his Conspiracy Science web site, which I highly recommend if you want to discuss any of the nitty gritty details in any section of Zeitgeist.

I can empathize with Peter Joseph Merola on one level. When I first started the Skeptoid podcast, I didn't really yet know what it was going to be about or where it was going to lead. I didn't keep references either. Having done it a few years, I now have my focus dialed in much better. I can see the same evolution from the conspiracy theories in the original Zeitgeist film to the utopian and philosophical topics Merola now talks about. He described Zeitgeist's inception as a personal project and a "public awareness expression", a context in which it was unnecessary to keep references or even to be historically accurate. I suspect that if he'd known where he was going to be today, he wouldn't have made Zeitgeist, and would have instead gone straight to the sequel which almost completely omits the conspiracy theories and untrue history.

If he had, the Zeitgeist franchise would probably not be nearly so successful. Nothing commands attention and feeds our native desire for power like a good conspiracy theory. If you know about the conspiracy, you're in on the secret information, and you are more powerful than the conspirators. For better or for worse, we all have a deep craving to have the upper hand. This is perhaps the main reason for the unending popularity of Zeitgeist, Loose Change, Alex Jones, Richard Hoagland, and other conspiracy theory machines. It also explains the passion shown by those who defend them: All that matters is "being the one who knows more than you," and the facts are a distant second.

No. Conspiracy theories are rarely true.
Just Say No and make the facts known with a Skeptoid T-shirt. Includes complete references! Get it now.
(See the full design)

Follow me on Twitter @BrianDunning.

Brian Dunning

© 2010 Skeptoid Media, Inc. Copyright information

References & Further Reading

Callahan, T. "The Greatest Story Ever Garbled." Skeptic. The Skeptics Society, 25 Feb. 2009. Web. 2 Mar. 2010. <http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/09-02-25>

Dunbar, D., Reagan, B. Debunking 9/11 Myths: Why Conspiracy Theories Can't Stand Up to the Facts. New York: Hearst Books, 2006.

Feuer, A. "They’ve Seen the Future and Dislike the Present." New York Times. 16 Mar. 2009, N/A: A24.

Lippard, J. "Zeitgeist: The Movie." The Lippard Blog. Jim Lippard, 11 Jun. 2008. Web. 2 Mar. 2010. <http://lippard.blogspot.com/2008/06/zeitgeist-movie.html>

Meigs, J. "Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Special Report." Popular Mechanics, March 2005 Issue. 1 Mar. 2005, Year 103, Number 3.

Pastor, Robert A. Toward a North American Community: Lessons from the Old World for the New. Washington: Institute for International Economics, 2001. 111-115.

Siegel, Jon. "Income Tax: Voluntary or Mandatory?" Jon Siegel's Income Tax Protestors Page. Jon Siegel, 31 Jan. 2007. Web. 3 Mar. 2010. <http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/jsiegel/Personal/taxes/IncomeTax.htm>

Winston, E. "Zeitgeist, the Movie Debunked." Conspiracy Science. Edward L Winston, 1 Jan. 2008. Web. 2 Mar. 2010. <http://conspiracyscience.com/articles/zeitgeist/>

Reference this article:
Dunning, B. "Zeitgeist: The Movie, Myths, and Motivations." Skeptoid Podcast. Skeptoid Media, Inc., 9 Mar 2010. Web. 21 May 2013. <http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4196>

Discuss!

10 most recent comments | Show all 219 comments

We were on site moments after Shanksville happened, as an emergency worker I can tell you there was no plane there at all, just a black hole. Search google images for 747 plane wrecks and look at the wreckage. I KNOW first hand that Shanksville was not a plane, and if they lied about that, well I guess that turns this whole shit eating story on it's ass now doesn't it. You idiots believe what you want, but Bin Laden not only didn't do it, but we also didn't capture him and give him a "Muslim Burial" at sea, find me an eye witness. As long as it's on CNN 95% of you will eat whatever shit is fed to you, much like this poorly written article that doesn't negate any facts but just calls the information "crap". I bet the author spends Sundays praying to ghosts and donating his money to pedophile networks as well. WAKE UP,....You are under voluntary control.

Mark, Shanksville
March 15, 2013 7:23am

I watched this movie found a lot of things in it I agree with, then others things very contradicting. I must say that the Bible has been altered "Yes" but it is mostly of TRUTH the bible has a lot of undeniable true predictions that are happening "NOW"!!!
Revelation 13:16-17, “He causes all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hand or on their foreheads, and that no one may buy or sell except one who has the mark or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.”
(in my opinion this might be the RFID. the mark could be a spiritual mark as well.) either way better good to play safe than a fool that gets the mark. Why is entertainment today super Evil, can't deny that!! I believe "Jesus" imaginary or not is coming to earth, and based on what you do, watch, or hear is Judgement in its own respect. Be open minded and "trust no man"<--- this is what the bible empathisizes. God bless and always love, because this is a experience, and we are in this world but not of it.

Lady, Humble, TX
March 15, 2013 11:17am

@Lady,

See now that's a perfect example of believing in "something" and finding anything and everything to revolve around it.

The Bible was written to interpret it several ways. It's so vague that when one person reads it and finds passages like you did, they will find some connection with that and a present day "event" and give the bible praise like that was talking about that exact situation and then thinking it's the absolute TRUTH.

If I was to make a religion...actually let me rephrase...the only way to make a successful religion is to set rules or harsh punishments for denying, questioning, or doubting said religion. Throw a bunch of examples of treachery, debauchery, disloyalty, and all other forms of selfishness and then show how you get punished for doing them. Also, throw in vague prophesies that you can use in everyday circumstances and voila! You have yourself a pretty foolproof religion! Oh I suppose you would need to find a bunch of followers and tell them to sit next to me in paradise they must give effort everyday to convert people. And that it is your duty to spread my word to everyone who does not know it and then give them the ultimatum they will burn if they don't follow.

I mean let's get real. Any all-knowing, all-powerful, 100% benevolent god would not create a world where you had to worship him. I mean just those descriptions alone are as much of a contradiction, if you throw in free will, as there ever will be. Don't be afraid to use your brain.

The Answer, Think For Myselfville
March 16, 2013 12:23pm

Oh Dear, Tim McHyde's sheep have reached Skeptoid.

This could be real fun!

Mud, Sin City, Oz
March 19, 2013 7:59pm

I think you are a paid troll. Paid to speak nonsense. You deserve no respect and I hope someone shuts this website down.

A, N
March 30, 2013 2:12pm

Any zeitgeist can easily earn $1000 by taking The Zeitgeist Challenge by providing pre-Christian primary sources. Go to zeitgeistchallenge.com and make your point. Even if you don't want to take the challenge, ATTEMPT to prove:

ATTIS:
Born of the virgin
On December 25th,
Crucified,
Placed in a tomb
And after 3 days, was resurrected.

using primary sources.

It's a great critical thinking challenge. $1000 says you fail.

Maria Silva, Paris, France
April 12, 2013 4:30pm

One thing to be considered is that Larry Silverstein (leaseholder of the WTC) aquired these properties in 2001 as well. Because of the collapse walked away with a mere 7 BILLION dollars in insurance claims. Also, it was a CHOICE to collapse building 7, made by Silverstein.

I'm in no position to debate back and forth on this topic. Just thought it was a curious point.

Derrick B., SD CA
May 02, 2013 3:53pm

I feel spiritually dead now after watching Zeitgeist. The religion and everything that I have ever lived for and believed in was completely threatened (almost demolished) by this movie. I simply don't want to believe the religious aspect of Zeitgeist at all, even though there is supposedly good evidence that would be considered "opinionated" by some people and "fact" by other people. I still have love for people. The spirit, mind, and body are all a very powerful connection, but at the same time fragile.

Just call me "Bob", Location(doesn't matter)
May 02, 2013 7:13pm

Derrick,

Larry Silverstein may well have decided to demolish WTC7. His 'pull it' comment is ambiguous. But there's no way that he had tiime to organise that before the building collapsed of it's own accord, due to the damage it had sustained and the fact that it had been left to burn, the FDNY having more pressing concerns than a building that had been evacuated.

And yes, the buildings were insured. So what?

Darren, Liverpool, UK
May 03, 2013 3:22am

The 3 Zeitgeist movies could be considered out there, but if we don't start making radical changes our species will not survive.No one can argue!

clayton, Derwood,Md
May 19, 2013 11:34pm

Make a comment about this episode of Skeptoid (please try to keep it brief & to the point). Anyone can post:

Your Name:
City/Location:
Comment:
characters left. Discuss the issues - personal attacks against other commenters, posts containing advertisements or links to commercial services, nonsense, and other useless posts will be deleted.
Answer 6 + 4 =

You can also discuss this episode in the Skeptoid Forum, hosted by the James Randi Educational Foundation, or join the Skeptalk email discussion list.

What's the most important thing about Skeptoid?

Support Skeptoid
 
Skeptoid host, Brian Dunning
Skeptoid is hosted
and produced by
Brian Dunning


Newest
All About Graphology
Skeptoid #363, May 21 2013
Read | Listen (12:42)
 
Polybius: Video Game of Death
Skeptoid #362, May 14 2013
Read | Listen (11:27)
 
The 16 Personalities of Sybil
Skeptoid #361, May 7 2013
Read | Listen (11:50)
 
Lincoln Kennedy Myths
Skeptoid #360, Apr 30 2013
Read | Listen (11:07)
 
Cupping for the Cure
Skeptoid #359, Apr 23 2013
Read | Listen (10:38)
 
Newest
#1 -
8 Spooky Places, and Why They're Like That
Read | Listen
#2 -
Skinwalkers
Read | Listen
#3 -
The Suicide Dogs of Overtoun Bridge
Read | Listen
#4 -
Student Questions: Food Woo and Iron Man at the Airport
Read | Listen
#5 -
Negative Calorie Food Myths
Read | Listen
#6 -
Listener Feedback: That Darned Science
Read | Listen
#7 -
The Loch Ness Monster
Read | Listen
#8 -
Area 51 Facts and Fiction
Read | Listen

Recent Comments...

[Valid RSS]

  Skeptoid PodcastSkeptoid on Facebook   Skeptoid on Twitter   Brian Dunning on Google+   Skeptoid RSS  
 
 


"Are We Alone?"
inFact with Brian Dunning



Support Skeptoid
Join today and become
a part of this.