Z-Day 2010 - "Be the change we want to see in the world

Post Reply New Topic

Defensive much? You claim we're immature yet you're acting like a kicking, screaming child with your BRING IT ON!! !! DX

How do you know the films contain facts when there are:
a) No sources?
b) Obvious exaggerations?
c) Typical propaganda techniques?

To cite the Zeitgeist movies as 100% pure fact is in a way just like saying the bible is fact. Neither have real concrete proof or sources so they're basically impossible to prove. I could also say that John Joe the sheep-shagging farmer next door is the leader of Illumanati, make up some BS about it and call it Zeitgeist 3 and you lot would howl like hyenias about it while w*king off to Noam Chomsky's pretentious bollocks.

The *only* way for me to believe it is to see it first hand. Or if I get some really damn good sources.

et's just say for argument's sake that you are right. Ae you happy with he fact that we are trrapped in a world of control and stagnated and arrested development? Why have you given up on the idea that "Life is what you make of it" and "You can do anything when you set your mind to it"?

To me you sound like someone who is defeated but satisfied with being walked on and herded everyday of your life. And to me that is sad.

This thread is not about the first Zeitgeist Movie. It is about the Zeitgeist Movement and it's annual even, Zday. TWO COMPLETELY SEPERATE THINGS I MIGHT ADD.

The only reason the first Zeitgeist movie keeps getting dredged up (rather irrelevantly I might add) is because people can't let go of their associative accusations concerning the fact that Peter Joseph made Zeitgeist: The Movie, and he also YEARS LATER conceived of The Zeitgeist Movement. THAT DOESN'T MAKE THEM ONE AND THE SAME THING! As I stated earlier, Zeitgeist: The Movie was made as an ARTISTIC EXPRESSION, by Peter Joseph YEARS before he made Zeitgeist: Addendum and conceived of The Zeitgeist Movement.

However, because people fail to see the intention that Zeitgeist: The Movie was made for, and because to them, it contains all the trademarks of "conspiracy crap" they IMMEDIATELY lump this documentary, along with anything else REMOTELY associated with it, either directly or indirectly.

I'm suprised they haven't tried to label the Smashing Pumpkins album as "conspiracy crap" purely because it was titled "Zeitgeist".

If you go to www.zeitgeistmovie.com which is the official site for the documentaries, and go to he transcript section, you have links to all the used sources. Thankyou.

And plus, I take care in what I cite. I check things out and don't take their word for it. If I'm not sure, then I check it out for myself. So I would appreciate that you take that on board befo9re you accuse me of being a sheepo for "zeitgeist" when you only seem to mention the first zeitgeist film, which is weird. I watch TONS of stuff and read TONS of books. The reason Zeitgeist has come up is because it is mainly relevant. Think about it this way. I wouldn't be posting on THIS thread and talking about Watership Down, would I? Acxtually don't answer that.

And for you to claim that the have been "exaggerations", then that would of course mean that you know of exact sources used and exactly what thse sources have originally said and by exactly how much these sources have been exaggerated. Think about it.

And by comparrison, please tell me how the first Zeitgeist film compares to say, a poster from the 40s featuring a little girl asking her dad "What did you do in the war daddy?" While the dad look at the viewer with an expression as if to say "I was a conscienscious objector. How am I gonna explain that to my daughter without looking like an upatriotic coward?"?

Since both Zeitgeist: The Movie and The Zeitgeist Movement are two separate things, and hense this thread is not about the first zeitgeist film, I will waver that for now since you are SO insistent on discussing the first film.

What are you hoping to acheive by typing this? This does not encouage me to take you seriously.

Actually, I never thought of that.



No, I just realise that humans can never truly be "free" from the clutches of control and manipulation. It's not just the government that controls you, it's your friends, family... even the books you read. Everything around you influences your thoughts and ideas in a councious or subcouncious manner. Even if you take away the media, the government and so on, you'll still be able to be easily controlled by external stimuli alone.



The Zeitgeist movement is based off the movie though, right? If that's the case, how are they "COMPLETELY SEPERATE THINGS" when they are linked?

I'm glad the feeling is mutual.

No, the Zeitgeist Movement is NOT based on the first film. I have explained before repeatedly that Zeitgeist The Movie was an artistic expression that wasn't even intended for mass consumption. And hense that is why Peter Joseph had to run around like a headless chicken acquiring permission to use the material he used by George Carlin, Bill Hicks, etc. once the film became one of the MOST VIEWED FILMS ON THE INTERNET.

As I have explained repeatedly, Zeitgeist: The Movie was made YEARS before Peter Jospeh made Zeitgeist: Addendum and conceived of the Zeitgeist Movement. He conceived of this organisation after he met Jacque Fresco and was introduced to The Venus Project. And Like I said repeatedly, this happened YEARS after the first Zeitgeist film was made. Peter Joseph has stated MANY times that "Zeitgeist 1 is NOT the Movement".

I hope I don't have to explain this again.

Here is one of the differences between you and me. I feel hesitant about taking you seriously because you have implied some disgusting sexual scenario as an insult while demeaning both myself and a group of others, thus invalidating any logical point you may have made due to the purile nature of your insult.

You feel hesitant about taking me seriously because you do not agree with me, and you feel my views are somehow crazy, wrong and utterly baseless, which of course leads you, not in the direction to intellectual discussion to present your ideas, but to obscene associative insults that make you look more like a bitter perverted child than anything else. Sorry.

I did not say you are insane. I said you are making claims which are insane. Without a psychological evaluation which I am not qualified to perform, it is difficult to tell whether you are actually insane. That you are making insane claims is a fairly readily observed fact.


All right then. Banking system should be the simplest to do, so we'll start there.. So, which particular variety of banking conspiracy do you buy into? The 16th Amendment never passed/income tax is illegal? The Fed is actually a private bank owned by Jewish reptilians? I have to have some starting point.





In this case though, it's the same crowd rather than two independent groups who happen to have a similar name.

I won't address the rest of the rambling right now.

Very well, elaborate on why and how they are "insane" claims.



If you have paid any attention to me at all ytou will know that I don't deal in conspiracy theories and I am not a conspiracy theorist. Once you factor this into your thinking, we will converse a lot better.



A little evidence will serve you better instead of laughing. Any fool can laugh.



A "crowd" did not make any of the zeitgeist films. They were made by one man. However there still seems to be a reluctance to let go of the whole "guilt by association" argument. Really it's getting old. Do people stop singing "Karma Chamelon" because Boy George has been denounced as a coke addict and paedophile? No. Just coz they happen to have a similar name? Crikey, when will you realise that they are not one and the same? I have repeatedly explained how they differ and how they are seperate.



Very well, when you do wish to, I'll be waiting.

Which is why I asked for a starting point on the banking system. You talked about "the MYTH of the banking system." What do you mean by that?


I've read your explanations and regarded them as BS. The same man is responsible for both, we can assume some sort of link between the two, yes? Will you at least grant that the Zeitgeist movement more or less endorses the claims made in the Zeitgeist movie?

The myth that The federal reserve banking system was "An economic stabilizer" When it has been anything BUT. The boom and bust cycle still continues unabbaited.

The myth that The monetary system which operates under the fractional reserve practise is actually good for us.

The myth that money is falsely claimed to be a natural resource.

The myth that we live in a "free country" or a "free world", when in fact, you are only as free as what your purchasing power allows.

The myth that the profit priority is a humane and productive incentive system.

The myth that human concern is ALWAYS the top priority.

To name a few off the top of my head.



Ok, we cannot go on this way. If you are just gonna blithely disregard my claims and even use a profanity to refer to them, then you really are not interested in discussing anything with me. The only thing you are interesting is stroking your ego by throwing out my claims in replacement of your own. Rather hypocritical when you said this:



And THEN said this:



That is what I mean by hypocrisy.

A few short observations:

Cycles occur in nature; if it were not economic cycles at the forefront, it would be weather, crop-production, oceanic - to expect it not to have a cyclic nature seems unrealistic.

One does not need money to have a free thought, or express themselves. What appears to be suggested with freedom without consequences, which is not something that I know to exist.

Human concern is always the top priority; it's just not consistent what humans are concerned about or with.


M.

I looked at the web site and decided that even though human societies are frequently horrible and abusive, it's still better than the hive-mind ant colony masquerading as a utopia that I saw promoted in the web site. Count me out!! I like being an individual human. I wouldn't want to trade that in to be part of a utopian hive mind even if it was a hive mind without wars.

Just for the record, a lot of science fiction writers have tackled this. "A Clockwork Orange" does it particularly well. That book and also movie make a pretty compelling case that you can't divorce violnce from free will. You can't get rid of one without getting rid of the other. Accepting one means accepting the other. The Zeitgest people may have convinced themselves that they have found the magic solution that will make people all get along in perfect harmony. Science fiction writers (And Anthony Burgess, who wrote "A Clockwork Orange") know better. The only way for people to get along in perfect harmony 24/7/365 is to stop being people. Ants don't have free will. They live in the utopia that Zeitgeist imagines. I don't want to be an ant.

You misunderstand. The resource based economy as promoted by The Venus Project and thus condoned by The Zeitgeist Movement is not a utopia. And people will not be all the same. I dare say you have made your judgements upon the slick designs displayed on the website. You must understand that Jacque Fresco has been working on these designs for decades. The only intention is to show what COULD be. Not what WILL be.

The understandings include the SYMBIOTIC and EMERGENT laws of nature. Put simply the understandings include how we are dependant upon our environment and that everything is always in transition. No human being is ever static because even in our current society you, yes, you are always changing because you are always learning new skills and gaining new understandings. We at The Zeitgeist Movement completely embrace this.

The Venus Project is not a Utopian concept. We do not believe in the erroneous notion of a utopian society. There is no such thing. Societies are always in a state of transition. We propose an alternative direction, which addresses the causes of many of our problems. There are no final frontiers for human and technological achievement - it will always undergo change. Even if we can design a society having all of the modifications to improve the lives of people and protect the environment we will still be at the beginning of the next phase. We are always in transition and learning new things.

The survival of any social system ultimately depends upon its ability to allow for appropriate change to improve society as a whole. The patterns we choose determine whether or not there is intelligent life on earth. In closing, to achieve this new social design, it will require much voluntary, unselfish participation for its realization. The future does not depend solely on The Venus Project. We only propose a direction. Our future depends on the decisions we make today.

People will be alike in the fact that they view war as unacceptable, yes, people will be alike in the fact that they view corruption as unacceptable, yes. The value system does NOTHING to stifle or disregard individuality. This new approach makes it possible for humans to be free, to do as they wish, thus COMPLETELY facilitating individuality and freedom of thought. HJere follows a list of the main likenesses that will be shared by the human minds of those in the resource based economy.

• Never accept anything unless fully explained
• Not judgmental of different cultures
• Curious of things that are new
• Instead of few people carrying the nation many will participate
• Allegiance to methodology, will have ability to solve problems and recognize that contributions come from all different cultures thus helping to eliminate prejudices
• Share resources and ideas

This list in no way suggests regimental uniformity and stagnant non-individuality.

Hardly. The boom and bust cycle has been significantly milder since the introduction of the federal reserve banking system.


What is your alternative?


I'm not sure what you mean here.


So? There are economic constraints and always will be.


I think very few people claim that the profit priority is always humane, it generally is regarded as amoral.


Where are you getting this?


They were mostly too vague to be realistically addressed. Where your claims were sufficiently precise to have any meaning, they were false.

To the rest: so no, you are not willing to admit that a movie called Zeitgeist and a "Zeitgeist Movement" both originating from the same person and both with essentially the same fanbase have anything to do with each other whatsoever?

As far as the "resource-based economy" of the Venus project, it's been brought up here before and rejected as too vague. All economies are resource-based, as economics is the fundamental problem of allocating finite resources.