Many people like to pigeon-hole the Zeitgeisters as communists... I think that might be adding a political meaning to the movement that really probably was not originally intended. I thought the ZG and the Venus Project were supposedly apolitical; perhaps I've been mis- or under- informed.
But, from what I gather about these people: They are anti-CONSUMERISM. So, what's the opposite of consuming? Producing. So, are they producers? Maybe wanna-be producers?
I've read elsewhere on this forum (and other places) that our current economic situation has something to do with the balance between consuming and producing tipping too heavily toward consuming. Anyway, I don't think the issue needs any extra politification. Just my 0.02 BTC.
By a-political they just mean they are the other side of the coin.
They would have to excert extreme political power to make their ideas reality.
If their ideas boil down to producerism (as opposed to consumerism), I can see that manifesting worldwide without any political influence at all... Aside from possibly comic relief
Hoo boy, that election happened, and people sure were acting more foolish than usual that day.
They cannot manifest without profoundly affecting current politics.
Therefore their ideas are very political in nature whether they realise it or not.
Nahhh... That's all backwards gobbledy-gook. Just because something affects something else, does not mean it is or becomes or has anything to do with the nature of the something else. Yeah, politricks will be affected -- by being more exposed than ever as the impotent (mostly with regard to effective policy-making: the thing it's supposed to be for) dress-up extravaganza that it is -- And then it might actually become (or be replaced [likely with "AI"] with) a system of distributing resources that is hopefully more efficient than the current abysmal policy-making system we have now. Politics is supposed to be about making policies that best distribute resources among entities, but the "politics" we all are used to is nothing more than a homecoming queen crowning.
Politics being affected or changed or exposed or eliminated... affected in any way, by any thing, does not mean that that thing that affected it is political. I guess I'm repeating myself here but it really looks like some backwards logic you are using, based on some sort of mindset that politics will always have to exist in its current form?
I mean, I pee in a fresh porcelain bowl of water. The water is then affected by my pee. Does that fact alone make my pee of the nature of water? What if I peed on the bowl instead of in it?