Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Zeitgeist?

Zeitgeist?
October 05, 2008, 08:53:28 AM
I'm sure some of you have seen the new Zeitgeist video and I was wondering what your thoughts on it were? It seemed to have dropped the entire "conspiracy" aspect of the first Zeitgeist (which I didn't care for) and put focus on the simple concepts of what makes (American) society corrupt.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7065205277695921912

Skip the first 2 minutes and the last 5 minutes.

Re: Zeitgeist?
October 07, 2008, 05:05:03 AM
Due to bandwidth limitations I can't watch it but I would like to ask does it contain elements similar to that of Jesus as an astrological allegory or is it purely a assault of modern America?

Re: Zeitgeist?
October 07, 2008, 11:58:14 PM
Due to bandwidth limitations I can't watch it but I would like to ask does it contain elements similar to that of Jesus as an astrological allegory or is it purely a assault of modern America?

As of this post, I'm in the middle of watching it, and so far it explains:
  • how the abstract monetary system we have is utilized to create valueless money and enslave people with debt
  • how the USA screwed the South American nations who had elected leaders that were anti-globalist by corrupting or assassinating them
  • how the USA manipulated matters in the favor of the money for the globalized empire
  • "terrorist" is a label used to describe everyone who challenges this system

It's more of an educational film than anything; an introduction to our monetary exchange system is fucked up, our government is fucked up, and you are fucked.

It presents our society as an invisible globalized empire, and the 'corporato-cratic leaders' of it are simply trying to achieve the goal of "maximiz[ing] profits, regardless of the social and environmental cost."

The realizations made in this film are probably unsurprising to most of us here(nothing that corrupt and anus haven't explained), but it elaborates on a lot of the details, and doesn't fail like the previous movie at explaining why everything is the way it is through religion and conspiracy theory.

Septicemia

Re: Zeitgeist?
October 08, 2008, 01:06:31 AM
Quote
As of this post, I'm in the middle of watching it, and so far it explains:

I watched it this past weekend.

The first half of it is educational, and based on the corruption of economics, and in turn America. I learned a lot from this.

The second half is a liberal futurist exposition centering on a bunch of people involved with the "Venus Project", futurists (maybe new-agers would be a better term) claiming everything - yes, everything - could be solved by technology, made into some perfectly ordered and interconnected joy of a future that they posited was at least better than the existing system (sounds familiar). They claimed their philosophical basis to be science, which empirically explores the "Emergent/Symbiotic" characteristic of nature (which reminded me of recent ANUS/Corrupt anti-traditional metaphysics statements).

I recommend people watch it for themselves instead of reading the reflections of forum-dwellers.

Re: Zeitgeist?
October 17, 2008, 06:53:41 PM
Sorry to say, I think the film's total bullshit.

First of all, it assumes the people who wrote the Bible had some knowledge of astrological signs and put it together accordingly, which I highly doubt on both scores.  Also, there's simply no way that 9-11 was staged.  Sure, there are some unexplainable things, but, as Noam Chomsky pointed out, in many controlled experiments that any scientist can conduct in the lab, there are plenty of events that occur that were not predicted and cannot be explained.  The melting of the steel in the twin towers can probably fall under that blanket term 'unexplained phenomena.'  Doesn't mean it was a put-up job.

Re: Zeitgeist?
October 17, 2008, 09:19:00 PM
Sorry to say, I think the film's total bullshit.

First of all, it assumes the people who wrote the Bible had some knowledge of astrological signs and put it together accordingly, which I highly doubt on both scores.  Also, there's simply no way that 9-11 was staged.  Sure, there are some unexplainable things, but, as Noam Chomsky pointed out, in many controlled experiments that any scientist can conduct in the lab, there are plenty of events that occur that were not predicted and cannot be explained.  The melting of the steel in the twin towers can probably fall under that blanket term 'unexplained phenomena.'  Doesn't mean it was a put-up job.

The very first post states that this topic is of the films sequel, not the original which is what you are criticizing.  And why do you highly doubt the astrological knowledge of the authors of the bible? All of the astrological phenomenon it mentions are very well known and have been since long before Christianity and goes back well into ancient Egypt, Babylon, mainland Europe and the American Incas up to three thousand years B.C.E.

Re: Zeitgeist?
October 18, 2008, 06:17:04 AM
People all want grand unification theories.

I believe the writers of the Bible, originally, were aware of astrology; did that survive the edits? Probably not.

Trying to tie together too many tenuous connections results in broken logic and paranoia.

It's better to approach the topic with solid logic, and constrain yourself to things that can logically be proved or inferred.

Re: Zeitgeist?
October 19, 2008, 04:46:31 AM
Quote
As of this post, I'm in the middle of watching it, and so far it explains:

I watched it this past weekend.

The first half of it is educational, and based on the corruption of economics, and in turn America. I learned a lot from this.

The second half is a liberal futurist exposition centering on a bunch of people involved with the "Venus Project", futurists (maybe new-agers would be a better term) claiming everything - yes, everything - could be solved by technology, made into some perfectly ordered and interconnected joy of a future that they posited was at least better than the existing system (sounds familiar). They claimed their philosophical basis to be science, which empirically explores the "Emergent/Symbiotic" characteristic of nature (which reminded me of recent ANUS/Corrupt anti-traditional metaphysics statements).


I recommend people watch it for themselves instead of reading the reflections of forum-dwellers.


Agreed, the second part of this video is hilariously retarded. Increasing the availability of commodities through technology will ultimately ensure that many humans will be born all the time, eventually overwhelming the human capacity to invent new technologies to deal with the increasing scarcity of resources (which is directly correlated to population increase caused by better technology). This does sound familiar. Wasn't this the whole point of the industrial revolution? Work less, do more, help everyone? It didn't work then, and it won't work in the "Venus" project either.

Fuck these ex-hippies. They are emotionally guided liberals with psychology degrees. Ignore their lies about removing hate and bigotry and scarcity from the world through some sort of mechanized-messiah.

Re: Zeitgeist?
October 21, 2008, 01:15:41 PM
Sorry to say, I think the film's total bullshit.

First of all, it assumes the people who wrote the Bible had some knowledge of astrological signs and put it together accordingly, which I highly doubt on both scores. 
Even if it does assume such a thing,  how do you explain the vast similarities between the Judeo-Christian faith and the other Pagan beliefs? I don't see the 'astrological element ' as a reason to call the film 'bullshit'. I don't see any reason to call it a mere coincidence too . But the crux of matter in Part I was the propagation of religion by the State.Here I feel they should have concentrated more on how Christianity or Islam was propagated. History is always ridden with controversies, so why should the widely accepted view be necessarily  even acceptable ?

Quote
Also, there's simply no way that 9-11 was staged.  Sure, there are some unexplainable things, but, as Noam Chomsky pointed out, in many controlled experiments that any scientist can conduct in the lab, there are plenty of events that occur that were not predicted and cannot be explained. ....  Doesn't mean it was a put-up job.
it may not have been an inside job, but what of the insane number of "irregularities" ? What of the same "irregularities" regarding the London bombings ? What of the link between the Bush family and the Saudis ?

Quote
The melting of the steel in the twin towers can probably fall under that blanket term 'unexplained phenomena.'
Wow, that's quite a smart way of discrediting all the reasons furnished by the movie, isn't it ?
__________________
Besides the '1984'-ish theories, the movie is useful because of the questions it raises which people normally don't even think about. Sure it's not possible to believe everything it claims but it must be given due credit for raising such issues. Just because it shows a extreme mistrust of government and Martin Luther King Jr., Gandhi and Lennon pictures, I will not  call it a liberal farce. I know most people are sheep and they'll never stand up and question but what of the wolves ?

Re: Zeitgeist?
October 23, 2008, 11:17:14 PM
Sorry to say, I think the film's total bullshit.

 Also, there's simply no way that 9-11 was staged.  Sure, there are some unexplainable things, but, as Noam Chomsky pointed out, in many controlled experiments that any scientist can conduct in the lab, there are plenty of events that occur that were not predicted and cannot be explained.  The melting of the steel in the twin towers can probably fall under that blanket term 'unexplained phenomena.'  Doesn't mean it was a put-up job.

Definitely. There are some really silly aspects to this video. I'd recommend people not to put so much emphasis on the conspiracy theories though. Obviously the US government is corrupt. But it's on a fundamental level. I thought the video was interesting though due to a few points in the video and how it blatantly supported the downfall of the US. Reminds me of Ted Kaczynski, except the viewpoint on technology are completely opposite.