Global Politics on Trial

Poised at the beginning of the second decade of the 21st century

we continue to find the geopolitical landscape in upheaval.

Wars, economic crises

and ever encroaching consolidated

national and corporate power structures

are re-shaping the world as we know it.

In reaction to the newest set of documents now made public

a contentious debate rages within capitals and cafes worldwide.

Most prominently in the Middle East as of January 30th 2011

the time this statement was written.

WikiLeaks’ controversial release

of previously classified documents

reveal one undeniable fact:

the current methods of global business and public policy

are on trial.

This wave of awareness in response to

our current geopolitical and economic system

is becoming apparent for the greater public

as we are witnessing the increasingly vocal response

by citizens of Tunisia, Egypt in the greater Middle East.

With the release of diplomatic cables

related to growing despotism and economic inequality

a new wave of individuals are standing up

to demand their right to exist within a free and open society.

Not as Muslims or Christians, Atheists or Jews

but as independent human beings requesting in greater numbers

their human rights to a free and independent life.

The numbers of citizens standing up for their inalienable rights

are rapidly increasing as the world is taking notice.

We have seen the dire predicament the citizens of Iran

suffered through in 2009 as an example

and this is happening now at a higher frequency

as the global economic and political paradigm

becomes more inadequate day by day.

This response in North Africa indicates that people

when given access to knowledge as to how their system truly operates

are given a choice.

they can either perpetuate a morally bankrupt

and economically broken world

or demand a more equitable alternative.

In a world where information is digitized and ubiquitous

it is of significance to point out that it has now been confirmed

that the entire Internet for Egypt has been temporarily shut down

along with high bandwidth (3G) wireless networks.

If nations fundamentally operate for the benefit of the people

as a primary motivating factor for public policy

what then would need to be suppressed?

Civil unrest can and will continue

as despots are replaced by slightly more benevolent

or malevolent politicians

depending on the collective whims of the body public.

The time has come to reappraise our current paradigm.

As previously stated, the disturbing concept of an “internet kill switch”

is not far from becoming a reality in North America or Western Europe.

Senator Lieberman, former U.S Vice Presidential candidate

has proposed such legislation

and it is in the U.S congress at the time this statement is being written.

This is what happens when inefficient

and irresponsible political entities

no longer operate for the benefit of their constituents

but instead operate to perpetuate the status quo

regardless of who inevitably gets trampled underfoot.

Like a wounded animal, it will do all that it can to guarantee its survival

no matter how sick it becomes.

Wikileaks' supporters and detractors, in both public and private

operate with the knowledge, that information is being suppressed

to justify the status quo

of the current geopolitical and economic climate.

Both parties further assert that

deception is being utilized to manufacture the consent of the world's citizens.

The reports suggest that the United States

has committed acts contrary to their stated political positions

and has also blatantly disregarded international law.

The United States, however, is not alone in that arena

it is now confirmed that other countries

including Russia, China, Saudi Arabia

and various states within the European Union and the greater Middle East

are involved in similar contradictions of character.

Three important questions

The Zeitgeist Movement would like to ask the listener to consider:

Does any government representing the people

and acting on their behalf

have a right to operate clandestinely

and in many cases, illegally?

If such actions are condemned by the majority

then what role does the press have in keeping the power structure in check?

Most importantly, isn’t this conduct and behavior

an indication of the fundamental problems within the system itself?

Global citizens of The Zeitgeist Movement

realize that the tactics a nation chooses

in order to undermine another nation, and their own people’s will

stems from the economic competition

and constant battles for finite resources within the modern economic system

as well as their own systemic perpetuation.

Such systems are now proven to be flawed

outdated and fundamentally corrupt.

The documents released thus far

have proven to define the current state of geopolitics in that regard.

When interpreted in the light of modern science and technology

and the enormous benefits they attribute to society

the word "geopolitical"

provides no relevance in regards to quality of life.

Science and technology have been solely responsible

for all improvements to the standard of living in our modern world.

Understanding that important fact

The Zeitgeist Movement advocates a systems approach

utilizing science and technology

for the intelligent management of the Earth's resources

and the social welfare of its population.

This concept in practice

is known as a Resource-Based Economy.

While neither supporting nor condemning

the legality of publicizing confidential information

The Zeitgeist Movement seeks to address the issues

brought to light via the numerous, previously classified

media released through the Wikileaks organization.

These documents accurately define the inner workings

of our system as it exists today.

We, The Zeitgeist Movement, are entering this public conversation

in order to discuss the relevance

of these published documents

in relation to the global monetary system.

The undermining of a rival nation's well-being

was the status quo of the last century

when governments of the world had made it their top priority

to maintain centralized power structures

through the use of intimidation

violence and economic warfare.

The data suggests that such systems

are being exploited into our present era.

The Zeitgeist Movement advocates the position

that such actions are now obsolete and increasingly dangerous.

The global population is realizing

that what happens to one will impact all.

We recognize that the current cultural climate

has offered the people limited access to relevant knowledge

and produces negative results.

Attributes of governance such as these

undermine mature and informed decision-making.

Suppression of dissent

as well as the distortion of objective truth

can only have negative consequences

and thus, relevant conclusions can never be achieved.

One must ask their representatives:

"How can undermining freedoms produce a sense of security?"

Can we really expect to create different outcomes

utilizing the unsuccessful approaches of the past?

Why is this planet, in one form or another

in a state of perpetual war?

For a just and reasoned society to flourish

open access to knowledge and its expression thereof

is essential as it exists as the cornerstone of freedom.

The “Cablegate” controversy has offered the public

an unprecedented glimpse into the inner workings of government

military and intelligence agencies.

These groups have not met the expectations

of a civil and reasoned society

by promoting leverage of the corporate and banking structure

underlying the global economic and political system.

Those aforementioned groups are producing fear and distrust

among many segments of the population.

These agencies are currently operating within a paradigm

they were created to oppose.

We understand that countries acting in their own self-interest

will go to great lengths to protect themselves

from each other and any “perceived” threats

as we have seen through the documents that have been released.

The obsession for security

is proving to be more detrimental to society

than the potential risk any leak or act of terrorism can cause.

Is the risk of losing one’s liberty a worthwhile price