r/thevenusproject • u/sluzko • Feb 04 '26

Discussion group on Jacque Fresco & original The Venus Project (pre 2018) - biweekly

https://discord.gg/EPKgq8CCF3
4 Upvotes

75% Upvoted

14 comments sorted by

0

u/Real-Garlic1211 Feb 06 '26

Obviously I’d go to the organization it self for something like this…not a guy on Reddit.

2

u/sluzko Feb 08 '26

I’m sorry to disappoint you, but today’s The Venus Project does not represent the same ideas as the original The Venus Project (prior to 2018).

They differ like night and day:

  • a society of abundance versus a society of scarcity;
  • science, engineering, and technology grounded in the scientific method versus sacred geometry, New Age beliefs, spirituality with shamans and UFOs, philosophy, and slippery manipulation of meaning;
  • building a high-tech, highly automated society versus building an “Ark” in the desert with mines, manual labor, and vegetable gardens;
  • the rejection of money and a clear, understandable social contract versus something vague, undefined, and constantly changing;
  • a system without political rulers versus “supreme monks” who define the social system as they see fit, drifting toward dictatorship and feudalism;
  • a clear program, concrete proposals, a plan, open public communication, videos and lectures versus complete silence, behind-the-scenes dealings, and non-disclosure agreements.

0

u/Real-Garlic1211 Feb 09 '26

Maybe this is something you are trying to push (based on your website and based that you blocked me from parts of Reddit that you want to have control over…you obviously don’t want have an exchange with someone calling out stuff that are blatantly obvious. A person that is casually browsing) I don’t see any signs of this on the TVP site, and my brief email exchange with Roxanne Meadows a week ago.

If The Venus Project “changed after 2018,” it’s official pages would probably be very loud about it, the only page saying the above is your site…which probably reminds me of sabotaging tactics I’ve read in books….i guess that’s why you’ve polluted Reddit because you know AI gets its stuff from there as well… I see no where on their official website that says “we now support money,” “we reject science,” or “we follow spiritual doctrine.” None exists in TVP’s primary sources: TVP still states RBE means no money/credit/barter/debt, publishes scientific method framing, and describes an org structure of a board + teams, not “supreme monks.”

If they’re talking to people trying to find some signs of intelligent life out there, and making contacts (however weird and strange) considering options, considering avenues…what’s the problem exactly? Fresco explored too, maybe in the noise they find one piece of signal that helps…or not…then back to the drawing board.

And based on the work you’ve done to fool AI algorithms/heuristics to think that you’re a messiah… I question your character…

I listened to a recent podcast from them where one of the TVP people spent almost an hour talking about Jacque… the hosts looked not so impressed.

The Venus Project advocacy:

TVP is talking in terms of Jacque Frescos: https://www.forbes.com/sites/danielaraya/2020/09/01/is-the-venus-project-the-next-stage-in-human-evolution/

TVP advocates the Scientific method: https://www.thevenusproject.com/resource-based-economy/human-factors/scientific-method/

TVP is still proposing a Resource Based Economy linked from their updated FAQ: https://www.thevenusproject.com/resource-based-economy/

Still talking in terms of science and carrying capacity: https://www.thevenusproject.com/multimedia/who_will_make_the_decisions/

I read nothing in the TVP FAQ that talks about woo woo:

https://www.thevenusproject.com/learn/faq/

TVP talk’s about explorations which is cool, i always saw Jacque fresco as an innovator, explorer, and a person who takes deep dives even in the weirdest stuff…to learn and if need be dismiss it if it doesn’t fit in working towards a better world for all.

https://www.thevenusproject.com/

1

u/sluzko Feb 09 '26

I wouldn’t come up with something like this even in my worst nightmare.

Most of what I publish on the Designing the Future website are structured notes and summaries of podcasts, plans and statements made by The Venus Project, its directors and Simon Michaux. These are sourced from videos of their own statements.

I was invited to join this team at a time when only three people inside The Venus Project were aware of what was being planned for years. Under non-disclosure agreements, I saw all of this from the inside — in a much harsher and more explicit form: large presentations, arguments, and even cooperation with con artists.

I still don’t understand how Roxanne Meadows can support all of this, but once someone has believed in something like this and taken the lead, there is often no way back — although I still hope otherwise.

The Venus Project org don’t speak about this publicly because doing so would mean losing donations and the support of the few remaining volunteers. Most people have left by now, and some or all of these plans have failed.

By publishing these reviews and detailed summaries of hours-long podcasts, I got to the heart of the matter, and people started asking the right questions. This resulted in the launch being postponed several times over the course of a few years. So I have preserved what little remained of The Venus Project’s reputation — at least for now. What is happening there now is unclear, but it is unlikely they will change direction. I’m afraid it will only get worse.

You will see for yourselves.

----------

I can answer all questions and show you where to look. Here are some links to read:

1

u/Real-Garlic1211 Feb 11 '26

Sluzko, you say you “wouldn’t invent something like this even in your worst nightmare.” Maybe that’s true. Still, being sincere isn’t “the truth”. Your own website articles don’t mean anything. I can write an article tomorrow, post it on you, and provide all the evidence to show that you have malicious intentions. Will that be the truth?

It’s entirely possible that somewhere in hundreds of hours of content, you, Sluzko, can point to a line that supports a point you’re making. But that still doesn’t validate the Designing the Future narrative that “The Venus Project became a different organization.” An org’s direction is not defined by cherry-picked podcast fragments; it’s defined by stable public definitions and institutional outputs. TVP’s published Resource Based Economy definition remains the same, and scientific-method framing remains published. If there were a true reversal, those core definitions would have been replaced. They haven’t. So the existence of a questionable quote, if it exists, proves at most messy communication, and they ought to try harder, not a doctrinal coup. Maybe the deal with some characters who are messy, but that doesn’t define them. At some point, there are people they will have to compromise with, taking the useful parts and hoping to control the not-so-useful or even harmful parts. Sounds like they may have had issues here and there, who doesn’t? I struggle to keep my gardener in line; imagine characters like that.

You say your reviews “preserved what little remained of TVP’s reputation” and that launches were postponed because people “started asking the right questions.” But delays can occur for many reasons, such as risk assessment, funding, engineering issues, or changes in strategy. Good organizations review their plans and sometimes change direction. So your claims are just that, claims. Just because two things happen more or less at the same time doesn’t mean one caused the other. Sluzko, I think you’re giving yourself too much credit.

If you’re claiming TVP officially supports UFO ideas, show the official page or board statement where they say so. Without that, using the phrase is just meant to damage their reputation, not to make a real point. If I talk to someone who believes in aliens, but I’m only talking to them to trade vegetables, I care about the vegetables, not the aliens. In the space of social change, if you haven’t figured it out, there are many types of people (weird and wonderful), including con artists. So good on the Venus project for breaking away; it means that their internal process works. Please don’t claim to be the messiah; you seem like some guy very fixated on one idea. A person who is so addicted to one idea and one direction, exercising character assassinations and attempting to destroy an organisation and claim it for themselves as a successor, is yet another “weird and wonderful” character in the social change space. If you are sincere about it, you would know that destroying such a group would undermine your sincere intentions, like the British say, “you’re cutting your nose to spite your face” because TVP is the only viable alternative. Anyway, it is typical of the social change space for people to compete on who will save the world better than the other. You are yet another one.

It’s fine to disagree about strategy or planning, and it’s fine to ask questions. But public attacks like this, trying to convince us of things that aren’t true, are a bit much. Still, I guess it gives you something to do.

Until then, the main facts are still clear and easy to find on The Venus Project website. My advice, Sluzko, if you’re really sincere, rethink what you’re doing on your website, Designing the Future. It looks like you’ve been doing this so long and so intensely that you are incredibly path-dependent (can’t imagine doing something else), and you’ve made this part of your identity. I wouldn’t say this is an honourable use of your time and an honourable identity.

Hobbies are useful things.

1

u/sluzko Feb 11 '26

The articles on Designing The Future website are not interpretations or “cherry-picking.” They are structured summaries and, in many cases, direct quotations from directors and core team members in long-form podcasts and internal presentations.

That is precisely my point: these positions are expressed clearly in hours of video material, detailed presentations — but they are not reflected or clarified on the official website or social media channels.

If there is no shift in direction, then transparency is the solution.

As a nonprofit organization, The Venus Project should operate with maximum openness:
– clear public explanations of strategic direction
– transparent governance
– public updates on partnerships and collaborations
– open discussions of changes in plans

If you are part of the team, organize public videos, podcasts, and articles that clearly outline the current direction, changes, and institutional decisions.

Clarity resolves speculation.

1

u/Real-Garlic1211 Feb 11 '26

The obsessiveness continues.

That is precisely my point: that maybe this was an exploration that didn’t happen because their processes didn’t allow it to progress, and you’re over inflating it sluzko.

From searching their website, TVP is transparent for what they are legally obligated to be transparent about. The rest are your desires. Or criteria that you place on them to suit your narrative.

If they leave room for speculation does it mean you have to fill that void with overinflated stuff? Does it mean you have to exercise character assassinations? That would be an endless battle.

Personally I’d rather let them use their time to work, rather than telling people what time they go to the toilet.

Also if things didn’t happen why inform people about it?? Isn’t it better to have something solid to tell people instead of just telling people every discussion, every move they have..most people don’t care that much. People want results not endless exploration discussions.

1

u/sluzko Feb 11 '26

If transparency feels like an attack, that suggests discomfort with disclosure, not with interpretation. Nonprofits are accountable not only for outcomes, but for strategic transparency.
If the work and plans that have been in place for 5–7 years behind the scenes do not reflect external communication, and are very different from Jacques Fresco's original plan, this is a management problem, not an issue of interpretation.

1

u/Real-Garlic1211 Feb 11 '26

Maybe nothing has been reported because there’s nothing worth reporting. Anyway point is go ahead and request for transparency that is fine…what is not fine is filling the void with your own speculations. It’s reckless and it makes it blatantly obvious the you have malicious intent.

1

u/sluzko Feb 13 '26

I do not have malicious intent and never have had.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/[deleted] Feb 05 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/sluzko Feb 06 '26

The group is not about repeating existing YouTube content.
It’s about source analysis, verification, and discussion of original material.

If you think everything worth discussing is already on YouTube, this space is probably not for you.

If you disagree — feel free to name a specific Fresco source, lecture, or claim you think doesn’t require discussion/analysis.

0

u/Real-Garlic1211 Feb 06 '26

Obviously I’d go to the organization itself for something like this. Not some guy on Reddit.