Zeitgeist Addendum

Post Reply New Topic

Multiple documents referencing a man named Jesus. That he was made up after-the-fact is an unnecessary complication that would be pruned by Occam's Razor. I'm not saying you have to believe the Biblical view of Jesus. I'm not saying I can give you irrefutable proof that he was the Messiah. I'm saying he existed.

Instead, let's argue Homer. Show me any evidence that Homer ever existed.

I thought that zeitgeist and zeitgeist addendum were both great documentaries with much truth to them. However, I truly wonder if the solutions they offer would be effective. A world with no monetary system sounds great.

The problem with the current monetary system is the control of governments over the central banks. Neither the lawmakers nor the governments should have control over issuing money. Perhaps on long run a kind of internal central bank would be the solution to stop politicians manipulating currency. Currency is much to important to leave it to people which mostly do not think further than the next election.

Really it's the other way around though. It's the central banks that have power over the governments.

It is not as much of a waste of time as Zeitgeist, but I consider the technocratic movement to usually be a bit of a waste.

1) I don't think they have honestly dealt with the field of economics at all, while still speaking mostly on that topic. For instance, of a particular interest to these folks would be the work of Friedrich Hayek, as he is their major intellectual opponent and has criticized at length their view of the economy and their view of society as a whole. Even neoclassical economics poses major problems for such a movement, given that their calculations on economic efficiency end up positing a rather large amount of these calculations, to the point of being undoable by supercomputers, and that is a major issue given that neoclassical models are openly considered useful oversimplifications. If emergent market solutions are better informed than centrally planned solutions(a thesis that modern economics generally accepts) then technocracy is wrong-headed from the start.

2) They know very little about social sciences. You can tell this by their writings as they never ever ever seem to address human nature or anything like this at all, only their dream of reconstructing society. I once looked at a book by a technocrat that put too much effort in defining how physics worked. The issue is that knowing physics does not mean that proper organizational structures for dealing with human beings are known, that human structures are recognized, that culture is ever factored in, etc. Heck, their writings don't even seem to recognize the existence of a plurality of values and that human systems are based upon a compromise of these values, and thus evaluate them using a problematic metric based upon the existence of that problem alone. If the technocrats tended to be psychologists, sociologists, economists, historians, political scientists, philosophers, or anything like that, then their efforts would seem to make sense as they would address the issue of society better, but they are just engineering-minded individuals with a scientistic point of view, and because of that they seem to be dangerously naive.

By all means:) This isn't quite the full story, but you can check out any of the links, read testimonies of those involved inthe Godlike site, do a Google search on the words Tavistock, Lop, etc. Some of this is a couple of years old now, but still relevant with the release of the new film.

As anybody can use google to prove that the 'facts' in Zeitgeist 1 and 2 are wrong pretty quickly, you have to wonder why the producers, Godlike Productions - who say they're intent on providing us with the truth - didn't check any of these details first? Simply because they didn't care, they don't claim them to be true. The disclaimer on their site quite plainly says that much of what they have on site IS fiction, and that timelines and facts have been changed. Zeigeist 1 and 2 are both works of fiction - and a badly made one too. The conclusions it draws about all forms of religion being based on Sun worship and/or Hinduism are wrong.

Godlike was formerly a large and happy discussion forum that was taken over by one Jason Lucas, now it's solely a front for Lucas and his ideas, but there is far more that's worthy of our attention at Godlike. Godlike are directly connected with spyware/malware company Lop.com, who are in turn connected to C2 Media (and too the nutty Rama cult who seem to have 'helped' fund Zeitgeist):

http://www.nomorespyware.50megs.com/c2media.html
"...C2 Media, located on London, England, likes to bill itself as a "legitimate advertising company". Anyone who has ever been infected with their advertising parasite, Lop, probably refers to them by other names. They feel that it is well within their rights to offer advertising to the average net-user. By "offer", they mean altering your IE browser through browser hijacks, adding toolbars and buttons, adding files and .dll files on your system, adding registry keys, and making itself at home in the Application Data folder. They sneak themselves onto computer systems by being obscurly bundled into other programs. It is also difficult to remove, requiring the user to perform part of the removal in Safe Mode and also accessing the regedit, something a novice or new user isn't proficiant at.

In articles, Lucas (owner too of GLP), compares this sort of infiltration as being perfectly acceptable and no different than watching a television commercial.

(http://www.ftc.gov/os/comments/spyware/040312lucas.pdf) He claims that people must pay to use the internet in the form of accepting unwanted advertising the same way we "pay" to use television and radio by listening to commercials. He seems to overlook the fact that the majority of people using the internet do pay for it's use....through their ISP services. And that the portion of the population using free ISP's are being served sponsored advertising through the free ISP. I feel that anyone paying $30 to $60 a month for the privilege of using bandwidth should not be required to suffer their unwanted adware, nor should they be allowed to alter the user's personal property, i.e., their computer. Those who use free ISP services are also served with advertising sponsored by the ISP service, which is their agreed upon terms with the service. Why does C2 Media feel these people should "pay" even more by turning over control of their computers to C2 Media?..."

Lucas is desperate to change the image of spyware to allow him to use it unfairly through Lop. This is part of his letter to the Federal Trade Commission to try and get them to accept spyware and adware as legal:

"...Much of the "evil" things heard about "adware" are over-exaggerations packaged
by the "anti-advertising industry" as a "fear sale" pressure tactic. This approach is
consistent with the interests of an "anti-adware" company in fostering fear and
discontent on the part of the general public regarding advertising software. The more
the public fears, the more the "anti-advertising industry" profits.

This, of course, is where the term 'spyware' takes on particular significance. The
term 'spy' has a menacing connotation for most people. Even though most 'adware'
actually does no spying, the "anti-advertising industry" advises the public that their
privacy is at risk from what is mostly a rather benign advertising software package. In
my opinion, at least half of all the 'facts' reported by even the most reputable 'anti virus' companies regarding advertising software are either untrue or half-truths. This is because it is obviously in their own financial interest to foster fear on the public mind so that it generates demand for anti-virus software. The fact is if you are in the 'anti
advertising' industry, the word 'spyware' sells (and that means money and profits for
those so-called "anti-virus" companies)...."

Godlike want malware to be legalised for two reasons, to make money, and because they're experimenting with social influence, through films like Zeitgeist. Look up the name Tavistock in connection with Lucas and Godlike.

Although it may sound like Godlike are simply appealing (rightly) for freedom of speech against the government, anyone thinking person must wonder why it's necessary to spread proven lies against the government and church to get freedom of speech? Godlike simply want the right to release films and stories that are either so totally ridiculous or contentious that people flock to the source to view them - whereupon GLP can see the effects of their work and make money from it,being a marketing company?

There are unfavourable reports on CM2 and its methods here:
http://www.nomorespyware.50megs.com/c2media.html
http://www.associatedcontent.com/art...ve.html?cat=47

"...Godlike Productions is involved in psychological operations , sometimes targeting specific individuals. There is evidence to indicate that some of the moderators and especially the owners have an agenda to stir up anti semitic sentiment by defending zionism as representing jews in general at the same time they vehemently attack anti zionists as anti semetic. There are also regularly threats allowed to be posted and remain as well as the personal information of those who were threatened, the goal is intimidation...."

GLP is a company who's films decry infiltration and underhand government tactics and lies of every kind - and yet it's a front for people who are using the same methods to influence the population and spread malware. If you support Zeitgeist, you support spyware and the loss of your privacy.

I'm also happy to provide links that prove that the alleged similarities between Buddha, Horus, Jesus, et al are non-existent. Most of it is based on the work of Archarya S (and god help us, Theosophy), an author who has distanced herself from the connections that Zeitgeist has made.