I experience Thrive as brilliant.  Much of it information I've gleaned from separate sources over many years, collated and seamlessly merged into a single narrative. I get that some simply don't believe it.  I have been to multiple local community screenings, many of which have featured appearances by people involved in the film.  This past Saturday was the most productive so far as Foster Gamble and Daniel Sheehan were both present with about 90 folks from the SF Bay area.

About 50 of us, with Foster and Danny, met for about 12 hours, primarily around NDAA.  I was in a small group with them initially discussing NDAA and the range of possible remedies.  Danny Sheehan is the attorney that prosecuted Oliver North in the Iran/Contra scandal.  Listening to him unfold and compare the inner details of the time then, and now, is chilling.  Not only around Iran/Contra, but he seems to have a photographic memory for every piece of legislation, dates and players surrounding this whole tangle going back to the turn of the 1900's.  The consistency and persistence of the same family and cadre of players enacting their game plan is astonishing. 

[Side note: A fact that came out, I was not aware of, is that the Federal Reserve Act expires in August of 2013.  I'm sure there was no pun intended when the word Act was added.  Therefore, the Fed owners (Morgan's, Rockefeller's, Rothchild's, etc.) have a swiftly narrowing window to complete their financial coup.  Who can say what that actually means, except to guess that most Americans may be unwilling to back a renewal of that Act and they know it.  Act I was enough.  Would anyone sit through a minute of ACT II?  As an increasing number of people are saying, there is a desperation for the Fed et al to wrap things up quickly.  It's undoubtedly too quick and too many people are informed to have this slip quietly under the radar.]

Anyway, in the wake of NDAA and the way it was near-unanimously approved, I think more people are taking pause with regard to Thrive.  (The blog post that David E. linked to above is really interesting.  It's on an alleged Transition founder's blog which baffles me.  It bothered me enough to reply in a few stages, especially after I found out who he was and allegedly stands for.)

The movie stretches your critical mind, and for some, too far.  Better too far than too little I would say.  It's what we don't know we don't know that imprisons us in our bubbles of bliss.

Here's the flip side after all of that information about "Them" and everything going on "out there".  Along with working on initiatives and policies, community initiatives and self sufficient practices, I need to engage my inner process.  I need to digest my anger and redirect all that energy into something innovative and creative.  They are me.

Peace.

I agree with Anna Harris. I'm of the "live simply, so that others can simply live," school.

Technology is the problem, not part of the solution. In order to "thrive," western civilization needs copper, cobalt, coltan, uranium, industrial diamonds, and other natural resources from Africa, and since Africans do not wish to allow these resources to be stolen, they can only be obtained if the colonialist powers of the world continue to install brutal dictators and fund proxy warlords to keep killing millions of Africans. But even if every last ounce of these natural resources were obtained, there is not enough of them for everyone to "thrive," so only the most powerful and privileged would benefit.

The industrialized countries have spent trillions of dollars on space programs while millions of people here on earth starved. The problem is an inequitable distribution of wealth, not any lack of abundance. In order for some to "thrive" others are murdered in cold blood. This is not done nonviolently. And the survivors of genocide have an absolute right to their anger and to self-defense. They have no obligation to submit passively, nor does anyone have any obligation to support the capitalist imperialist governments engaged in genocide and recolonizing Africa. Supporting such governments is supporting violence, even if the people thriving don't do the actual killing themselves.

Once everyone on the planet has their basic needs ensured, I'd listen to suggestions for thriving, as long as they would be guaranteed to everyone, not just to the fortunate. The US has always thrived on inequality and exploitation. The 1% thrive more than the 99%, of course, so the 99% are indignant and want a bigger cut of the spoils. What I want is an end to inequality and exploitation. I want no more for myself than it is possible for everyone on the planet to have, and no more for anyone than for everyone else. This is a finite world. If you take 30% of the world's resources and give them to 5% of the global population, that 5% may thrive but the other 95% will suffer. And they'll try to defend themselves, so you'll have to create multi-trillion-dollar weapons systems and militaries to enforce such unequal distribution.

It really isn't the 1% who are the problem, it is the 5% who benefit from and thrive on the proceeds of capitalist imperialism. To believe it possible for everyone to have everything in a world where none of us even have clean air or water, all are subject to global pollution, and billions exist in the most extreme poverty imaginable, isn't just magical thinking, it is callous indifference to and disregard of reality.

Foster Gamble and Daniel Pinchbeck will chat January 30.  Register to gain access to that and more for $20.