The Zeitgeist Movement: Any questions?

Post Reply New Topic

I think you're reading into my post a bit. Was only saying that guns don't solve anything, and any student of history should see that plain as day. You don't, you say your position is justified, but in the end you just propagate that which has come before.

As for "worse idea" and all that, well that's novel. If you can refute the core ideas of an RBE, then why not just do so; I challenge you to be fair and clear, and to avoid using coloring words & phrases. Can you do that? Otherwise, you're just wasting everyone's time here.

Dismissing these ideas with some easy "i did the research" statement, is just lazy. If you got the minerals, step up and show them.

Your original post clearly indicates that you are an advocate of this model.



Please point out the post where somebody explicitly asks you to think on their behalf. This reaction is a contrived and spurious evasion of any of the questions that have been raised by either myself or other posters.



Whether or not you are a fascist is of no interest to me. My concern is merely with the nature of the utopian dreamworld that you appear to be promoting. Information about all things seemingly excludes any viewpoint that might conflict with your own. As for thinking for ones self, I find it a little ironic that you are (incorrectly and without founding) lambasting people for not thinking for themselves, yet asking those same people to provide questions for you. To then completely ignore those questions takes this thread well beyond the sublime.



Finally you end your post with a repetition of your ridiculous claims, along with some fairly poor insults. No, phrasing an insult in the form of a question does not make it any less so.

If you are only fielding questions from those people whose viewpoint agrees with your own then your cherry-picked findings will be completely devoid of value. Good luck with your single-sided debate.

Skafather brought up some valid counter arhuments that are firmly rooted in human nature. It is your response (and the Zeitgeist Movements response in general when other people bring this up- Google is my friend) that horrifies me. People bring up valid points about how this sort of system is impossible given the constraints of human nature. Your response (the general Zeitgeist response) is more or less to say that we should change human nature. Once people align their thought processes with the Zeitgeist way of seeing things, all the conflict will just fall away.

I didn't bring up Pol Pot lightly in my other post. He is the only person (with a modicum of power) who seemed to think (per biographies) that he could simply declare human nature to be the way he thought it should be and his sytem would fall into place. I see that same revolting thought process at work here. Evil.

One by one:

- We intend to start by taking measure of the resources available in a given area, then extrapolating what's possible from that.

- People who program and care about the survival of our species, mostly volunteers. Such as is done with thousands of similar projects intent on improving the standing of our species.

- As for Poincaré & Lorenz, an RBE isn't about "government" setting prices ignorant of market forces; there is no "government" in the definition we have today. If you're asking how the price of something is set, then I direct you to the root materials for further study; hint: there are no prices.

An RBE is about our understanding of the root causes of shared social ails, how such things lead to the results we have, and choosing to generate different results. How that is considered sinister by some only reflects the programming they've received.

Skafather brought up some valid counter arhuments that are firmly rooted in human nature. It is your response (and the Zeitgeist Movements response in general when other people bring this up- Google is my friend) that horrifies me. People bring up valid points about how this sort of system is impossible given the constraints of human nature. Your response (the general Zeitgeist response) is more or less to say that we should change human nature. Once people align their thought processes with the Zeitgeist way of seeing things, all the conflict will just fall away.

I didn't bring up Pol Pot lightly in my other post. He is the only person (with a modicum of power) who seemed to think (per biographies) that he could simply declare human nature to be the way he thought it should be and his sytem would fall into place. I see that same revolting thought process at work here. Evil. Ordinary monsters like Hitler and Stalin recognized that human nature is how it is and they worked within the constraints of human nature to unleash their evil. They succeeded on a pretty big scale. Mao took it a step further and wanted to pretend that human nature could be forced to fit and he unleashed evil on a big scale too. I personally think Pol Pot was more evil than any of them because he wanted to go Mao one better (or worse) and just assume that human nature was exactly the way he wanted it to be. He didn't even seem (per biographies) to even think of other people as being individual other people. They were just some sort of blob separated into different bodies for him to move about. Luckily for us all, he was the least powerful of any of them so his evil was limited by his lack of power.

Luckily for us all, Zeitgeist has no power whatsoever and never will, so its horrific plans can never be anything but an internet curiosity.

One by one:

- We intend to start by taking measure of the resources available in a given area, then extrapolating what's possible from that.

- People who program and care about the survival of our species, mostly volunteers. Such as is done with thousands of similar projects intent on improving the standing of our species.

- As for Poincaré & Lorenz, an RBE isn't about "government" setting prices ignorant of market forces; there is no "government" in the definition we have today. If you're asking how the price of something is set, then I direct you to the root materials for further study; hint: there are no prices.

An RBE is about our understanding of the root causes of shared social ails, how such things lead to the results we have, and choosing to generate different results. How that is considered sinister by some only reflects the programming they've received.

The core idea of RBE is that people will just go along with it. They won't. Because they're people. That's what skafather and others was getting at. This idea only works if a core piece of human nature is removed. I would rather live in a contentious and war- torn world than live in your post-human zombie utopia where everybody just goes along with the plan because they aren't actually people anymore. Brrrrrrr.

@Janissy
Your continued, repeated efforts to insult and diminish these ideas only show how weak your position really is. If you were capable of making your point, you would without the need to keep hammering home your beliefs. Sorry.

Wish I didn't have to state this, but alas on the web, there is no shortage of temperamental mis-informed pedants incapable of actual debate but who are always absolutely certain of their beliefs! and I only have so much time to give.

Such, if you're capable of having a discussion based on the merit of ideas, rather than calls to fear & emotionality, without resorting to such immature behavior, would be happy to discuss this topic further with you.

If not, best of luck to you. You're my brother after all

You should heed your own words considering you're not the only one to have had this idea, obviously.

Sorry, that is a false statement. No one is expecting this to 'just happen' or for people to 'just go along with it'. You're projecting in the absence of factual information.

As for Utopia and your misunderstanding of "human nature" et. al., you're also projecting showing your lack of information. Simply we don't advocate utopia, in fact it is understand there is no such thing. You'd know that fact, with even just a little bit of reading.

Really you're going to have to do a little bit of research on your own. I'm not here to spoon feed you, even if you cry about it.

You wanted people to "think for themselves" but you can't handle it when I actually do. I don't fit into your New World Order. But neither does anybody else so I';m not worried.

I will if you show me where a point-by-point, honest, unbiased comparison can be made between what we proffer and something that has come before. It's a bit of a loaded request, because simply there hasn't been anything like this before.

Please don't do this if you're going to be lazy about it and make an apples-to-oranges comparison, or if you're not prepared to see it through. Again, I'm not here to do your homework.

And sure there have been elements of this or that in totally different contexts, same with any social structure, including our current capitalism.

Perhaps more relevant is this question: Do you believe we'll have capitalism until the end of time? If you answer "no", then when do you think it is a good time to move away from it? 32000 children die of hunger every day... isn't it time now? How about tomorrow with another 32000 children dead? Next year? Next 300 years?

When is it time we grow up and accept the facts about what our choices result in?

I did quite abit of research (Google, at least). What I repeatedly found is that nobody in the Zeitgeist Movement is willing to say HOW they would reallocate resources from the 6 billion people who currently are claiming them. There is also no statement of what will be done with people who resist this allocation. There is simply the repeated mantra that they will. What you call "spoon feeding", I call actually answering the questions you have been asked.

But nobody in the Zeitgeist Movement actually is willing to do that. Therefore, having researched and found that answers don't exist, I am left to conclude that either answers don't exist, or the Zeitgeist Movement people do in fact plan to do Mao-ist style re-education but won't admit it. Post-human zombie is a science fiction stretch, but when the ZM people refuse to put anything on the web about "how", only "why", then a science fiction stretch is called for.

Mao and Pol Pot. I stand by that.

Of course I am an advocate of this direction. However I am not the founder.







I think that speaks for itself. Because it conveys either one of two things. The assumption that I am the visionary of an RBE and that I havre to convince you all, or that I am being asked to think for you all arbitrarily.



If you read my first post on this thread, you will know that I have created this thread to accumilate questions for my radio show that I will answer on air.



Like I said, I am accumilating questions for my radio show.





You have not digested the reason why I created this thread in the first place. I have actually been working all day on my respose to Orwell's question, who if you look back at previous threads has been 50% of the main opposition to me on this forum. So no, I don't just take questions from those who agree with me. I take questions from anyone who is civil enough to pose a question without turning this thread into yet another semantic debate. Orwell was able to put prejudice aside and stop attacking the idea and actually ask a question. And I have taken great care and pleasure in generating an answer for him.

Now I have wasted too much time on this petty debate. I have created this thread to ask people to pose questions for me to answer on my radio show that I will be hosting in the near future on blogtalkradio.com. Please be civil. Now I am from now on gonna ignore any debate tactics and provokations. If you have a question, pose it. If not, post somewhere else.

Ok, with this debate in mind, what would the movement do with people who are vehemently against such a system? I pose this not as an attack on the idea, but a serious question. How can you make people think your way without force?