Zeitgeist Addendum = Steaming Pile of NWO Propaganda

[Petar]

The movie started by establishing the fraud of the US monetary system, which it applied to the IMF and World Bank, and then extended to the global corporate empire that is raping the world through "capitalism" and "free trade".

True capitalism and free trade were thus demonized.

It stated that all systems that are based on money are inherently corrupt, whether it be socialism, fascism, capitalism, or communism, but I believe that it stated that capitalism is supposed to be the worst.

It stated that people need to create a system that is "based on resources" so that there is "no competition", and then people can solve every problem with technology.

It argued that trying to change politics is useless, because in a "monetary system" everything is inherently corrupt, and supporting Ron Paul is particularly useless evidently.

Zeitgeist Addendum also wants everyone to give up their religions, so that the whole world can focus on the "collective cosmic conscience".

This is classic NWO propaganda.

For those of you who aren't aware, the international banksters financed the Bolshevik Revolution and created Communism, when Rothschild agent Jacob Schiff financed Leon Trotsky in New York.

This "resource-based technocratic utopia" tripe is just the latest version of the propaganda that they will use to create global fascism by manipulating all sides of civilization.

Please compare these forms of propaganda to the actual tenets of the original Bavarian Illuminati, which was established by Adam Weishaupt on May 1, 1776:

•Abolition of monarchies
•Abolition of ordered government
•Abolition of private property
•Abolition of nationalism
•Abolition of marriage
•Abolition of religion
•The communal education of children

NWO = Jesuits + Zionists + Knights of Malta

[literatim]

The first one was propaganda, why wouldn't the second one be?

[Cunningham]

I think they weren't using free trade and Capitalism in the same way you think of it. Those terms have been horrible corrupted such that they really have been co-opted. Free-trade as it's used today is really cover for managed trade that destroys economies like the movie discussed. Capitalism as it's used in popular culture is really corporatism/facism. They used the terms in the way popular culture uses them not the way libertarians use them.

The NWO is trying to impede a post-scarcity economy not bring it about.

[Petar]

I think they weren't using free trade and Capitalism in the same way you think of it. Those terms have been horrible corrupted such that they really have been co-opted. Free-trade as it's used today is really cover for managed trade that destroys economies like the movie discussed. Capitalism as it's used in popular culture is really corporatism/facism. They used the terms in the way popular culture uses them not the way libertarians use them.

The NWO is trying to impede a post-scarcity economy not bring it about.

Well, Zeitgeist Addendum used "capitalism" and "free trade" in the same ignorant way that the masses do, otherwise they would have been promoting the concepts instead of blaming them for the worlds problems.

As for whether or not the NWO sincerely wants "post scarcity", my argument is just that this whole fairy tail is being spun so that resisters believe that supporting the CFL is useless, just like the movie says.

Also, if resisters just focus on "collective cosmic conscience" then they will be effectively disarmed as well.

A "collective cosmic conscience" movement will also promote the "New Age" one world religion agenda, which is central to the real plans of the NWO as well, IMO.

Also, this "Project Venus" thing seems to go with that, because "Venus" is an ancient pagan deity associated with "Lucifer", and that is exactly what the "New Age" will be based on, which anyone who does the research will quickly find out.

[revolutionman]

I've been denouncing this film for a while now.

Collective consciousness my ass.

[Conza88]

Thanks for this.

It's like people in the 911 movement. A fair few; see it as only Bush.... and the lefty fken retards; go on to think capitalism is tyranny etc - and THAT is what the NWO wants...

I haven't been able to get a straight answer; from the folks over at a 911 forum i visit everynow and then...

If the NWO = TYRANNY.

What is the opposite of tyranny? LIBERTY / FREEDOM.

Thus; ECONOMIC FREEDOM & SOCIAL FREEDOM is what the NWO wants to get rid of..

They can never seem to explain how capitalism is exploitative..

Edit: Naturally I'll check it out for myself & report back.

[Cunningham]

Well, Zeitgeist Addendum used "capitalism" and "free trade" in the same ignorant way that the masses do, otherwise they would have been promoting the concepts instead of blaming them for the worlds problems.

As for whether or not the NWO sincerely wants "post scarcity", my argument is just that this whole fairy tail is being spun so that resisters believe that supporting the CFL is useless, just like the movie says.

Alright. I can agree with all that :) I agree with most of the movie but i also think that more Ron Pauls would make the transition to higher technological change far easier. I think Ron Paul would tend to get government out of there way a bit. I didn't quite get the swipe at Ron Paul in the movie either.

[DFF]

He wasn't badmouthing Ron Paul; he was saying that one man, even as good as he is, isn't the solution to humanity's problems.

[DFF]

Also, this "Project Venus" thing seems to go with that, because "Venus" is an ancient pagan deity associated with "Lucifer", and that is exactly what the "New Age" will be based on, which anyone who does the research will quickly find out.

Here's what my research turned up: The Venus Project is so named because *drum roll please* it's based out of Venus, Florida. LOL!!!

The Venus Project
21 Valley Lane Venus, Florida 33960
(863) 465-0321 FAX: (863) 465-1928

[Petar]

Here's what my research turned up: The Venus Project is so named because *drum roll please* it's based out of Venus, Florida. LOL!!!

The Venus Project
21 Valley Lane Venus, Florida 33960
(863) 465-0321 FAX: (863) 465-1928

If they can get their pyramid on your dollar, I'm pretty sure that they can name a city in Florida for their own spiritual purposes as well.

[Hiki]

If they can get their pyramid on your dollar, I'm pretty sure that they can name a city in Florida for their own spiritual purposes as well.

http://images.yuku.com/image/gif/154350b2e7aaa82e88c4f738142dd89f1464ebe.gif

[Captain America]

i like the idea of complete automation and a resource economy

[RJB]

Here's what my research turned up: The Venus Project is so named because *drum roll please* it's based out of Venus, Florida. LOL!!!

The Venus Project
21 Valley Lane Venus, Florida 33960
(863) 465-0321 FAX: (863) 465-1928

Sounds like a porno movie studio... just saying:D

[Petar]

He wasn't badmouthing Ron Paul; he was saying that one man, even as good as he is, isn't the solution to humanity's problems.

It said that supporting Ron Paul is useless, because everything in a "monetary based system" is inherently corrupt.

[shida]

I'm totally anti NWO, I know they're trying to implement a one world religion and that they're also behind the New Age movement as a means to progress this. But NWO propaganda isn't how it came across to me.

The end of religion has to come because it doesn't serve us. It merely divides us and causes us to fight. A belief that it's in God's hands/God will help us/It's the will of God, merely takes away our individual power to change our own circumstances. The truth is, no one is going to help us except ourselves. The admission of this is a huge responsibility for an individual and many would prefer to abdicate it to some external power, be that a politician, Jesus, Mohamed, Buddha, whoever.

Do the people of Iraq not pray to God? Has he helped them? Will the people of America and elsewhere around the world not pray to God when they are loosing their homes and they have no food? Will he/she help? Highly unlikely, it's not his day off, he's not answering for the simple and logical reason that he/she/it does not exist. The end of religion just happens to be the same goal of the NWO in terms of the next stage of their agenda. The ultimate question is, who will finally be in a position of control.

As far as the collective consciousness goes and the power of the mind, it does have an impact on outcome, take a look at this video on the power of intention.

http://www.consciousmedianetwork.com/members/lmctaggart.htm

In order to change our current situation and to escape the NWO we need to have a complete paradigm shift in our way of thinking. I can see where the maker of this film is coming from.

Support of liberty minded candidates who will free us from government and implant in our minds the seeds of our own power, (Ron Paul) non compliance with the system (Ghandi) and the power of focused thought on a reality we wish to experience rather than one the NWO would have us experience are the three steps for us to follow to regain our own power.

[Alawn]

Thanks for this.

It's like people in the 911 movement. A fair few; see it as only Bush.... and the lefty fken retards; go on to think capitalism is tyranny etc - and THAT is what the NWO wants...

I haven't been able to get a straight answer; from the folks over at a 911 forum i visit everynow and then...

If the NWO = TYRANNY.

What is the opposite of tyranny? LIBERTY / FREEDOM.

Thus; ECONOMIC FREEDOM & SOCIAL FREEDOM is what the NWO wants to get rid of..

They can never seem to explain how capitalism is exploitative..

Edit: Naturally I'll check it out for myself & report back.

The biggest 9/11 group, the AJ crowd, doesn't think that way. They want all the same things Ron Paul wants. They don't hate capitalism and libertarianism. You should hear how much he bashes Obama.

[Petar]

http://images.yuku.com/image/gif/154350b2e7aaa82e88c4f738142dd89f1464ebe.gif

I'm sorry Worf, I didn't mean to make you upset.

Please don't tare off my arms because I'm not willing to pretend the world is Star Trek.

Thank you.

[Lovecraftian4Paul]

I skimmed through the film and haven't taken in the whole thing yet. But from what I saw and from reading the reports of others, it makes me nervous. I thought the section about the Federal Reserve and fractional reserve banking was quite good. However, talk about automated utopias and a moneyless economy is incredibly disturbing. Yes, perhaps in the far, far future it will get to that. I'm not sure how, only some incredible leap in manufacturing technology and a planetary change of attitudes about what an economy should be. Of course, that's a globalism of an entirely different kind--and still somewhat sinister.

Even if the utopia-like vision in Zeitgeist unfolded, it creates a whole host of problems. What's to stop power hungry individuals from seizing control of this technology? Who would govern in a system like this? Even a benevolent "new world order" is still one that wishes to strip away important traditions like nationalism, religion, and sovereignty. That is anti-liberty. However, I don't foresee us ever having a utopian world or society anywhere. If we ever do get as advanced as Zeitgeist claims, then each country will probably be doing the titanic work of branching out into the stars and settling other worlds. No matter how good the machines are, this will still require a good amount of mental and physical labor to accomplish.

[Conza88]

The biggest 9/11 group, the AJ crowd, doesn't think that way. They want all the same things Ron Paul wants. They don't hate capitalism and libertarianism. You should hear how much he bashes Obama.

Yes I know, thank God.

I'm more referring to 911oz I guess. *sigh*

[aravoth]

I didn't see any "capitalism bashing" going on. It seemed to me that he just presented the fact that regardless of the governmental structure, the monetary system remains the same, and it is that monetary system that is evil. The reason he used Free Market Capitalism under the control of a central bank as a wedge to drive his point home, is becuase it is the most dominant, and most identifiable.

Yes yes, I know there is no such thing as free market capitalism with a Central Bank, we all here know this, but the other 99% of people don't. And sometimes you have to break the barrier that way.

[Paulite]

thezeitgeistmovement.com launching october 10th. wow i belong to 2 movements simultaneously.

[Vet_from_cali]

this is way ahead of our time i think.



http://i35.tinypic.com/xqjgg3.gif

[Adrian.Bisson]

This film is thought provoking, especially in the beginning, but then veers off course and becomes stupid. The Venus Project stuff is a load of crap.

The film is dead wrong in suggesting that the profit motive is the root of all corruption. The truth is that governmental force and coercion are the fundamental source of our problems, a position that this film does not address.

It's ridiculous to contend that the concept of scarcity is irrelevant, and everything falls apart from that notion forward. Scarcity is and always will be centrally relevant to human existence, and free market capitalism is the best way to allocate resources efficiently IF the coercive intervention of government power can be limited.

Also, the Venus Project people seem to take for granted that they are qualified to be the arbiters of the "best" way of life for people. When they talk about all crime etc. disappearing under their one-world government it makes me shudder. I wonder what they would do with people who didn't fit into their utopian vision. Re-education camps I'm sure.

Anyone who thinks the Venus Project vision of central planning using to allocate resources is a good idea should research China's Great Leap Forward, which had a similar view of how "amazing technology" would benefit the people.

The technologies that were enforced ended up causing mass starvation. For example:
"On the communes, a number of radical and controversial agricultural innovations were promoted at the behest of Mao. Many of these were based on the ideas of now discredited Soviet biologist Trofim Lysenko and his followers. The policies included close cropping, whereby seeds were sown far more densely than normal on the incorrect assumption that seeds of the same class would not compete with each other. Deep plowing (up to 2m deep) was encouraged on the mistaken belief that this would yield plants with extra large root systems. Even more disastrously it was argued that a proportion of fields should be left unploughed."

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward

The Venus Project's one-world government view of eliminating all competition is simple COMMUNISM warmed over for a new generation.

[Vet_from_cali]

This film is thought provoking, especially in the beginning, but then veers off course and becomes stupid. The Venus Project stuff is a load of crap.

The film is dead wrong in suggesting that the profit motive is the root of all corruption. The truth is that governmental force and coercion are the fundamental source of our problems, a position that this film does not address.

It's ridiculous to contend that the concept of scarcity is irrelevant, and everything falls apart from that notion forward. Scarcity is and always will be centrally relevant to human existence, and free market capitalism is the best way to allocate resources efficiently IF the coercive intervention of government power can be limited.

Also, the Venus Project people seem to take for granted that they are qualified to be the arbiters of the "best" way of life for people. When they talk about all crime etc. disappearing under their one-world government it makes me shudder. I wonder what they would do with people who didn't fit into their utopian vision. Re-education camps I'm sure.

Anyone who thinks the Venus Project vision of central planning using to allocate resources is a good idea should research China's Great Leap Forward, which had a similar view of how "amazing technology" would benefit the people.

The technologies that were enforced ended up causing mass starvation. For example:
"On the communes, a number of radical and controversial agricultural innovations were promoted at the behest of Mao. Many of these were based on the ideas of now discredited Soviet biologist Trofim Lysenko and his followers. The policies included close cropping, whereby seeds were sown far more densely than normal on the incorrect assumption that seeds of the same class would not compete with each other. Deep plowing (up to 2m deep) was encouraged on the mistaken belief that this would yield plants with extra large root systems. Even more disastrously it was argued that a proportion of fields should be left unploughed."

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward

The Venus Project's one-world government view of eliminating all competition is simple COMMUNISM warmed over for a new generation.

i must have missed that remark bout a placement of one world government. i remember something similar to the abolishment of all government lol. anyone got cliff notes on this vid? 2hours is OD long..

[Paulite]

this is why people who are very indoctrinated cant see documentaries like zeitgeist. because its like telling a christian that jesus is fake. look at the adrian post above. he completely twisted the whole plot. but is not his fault is that if he has a golf ball size concious after watching zeitgeist he ended up with a golf ball size understanding of the film.

[FindLiberty]

retracted...

I do like this new film for it's monetary / world government education (how evil it is). Watching again, paying more attention. (too dramatic at start - it put me to sleep)

[JosephTheLibertarian]

Hello, old friend lol. I just think the movie is incredibly boring, that's why I didn't watch the whole thing. If what you say is true, then it just adds insult to injury imo.

Zeitgeist Addendum is a new version?


The movie started by establishing the fraud of the US monetary system, which it applied to the IMF and World Bank, and then extended to the global corporate empire that is raping the world through "capitalism" and "free trade".

True capitalism and free trade were thus demonized.

It stated that all systems that are based on money are inherently corrupt, whether it be socialism, fascism, capitalism, or communism, but I believe that it stated that capitalism is supposed to be the worst.

It stated that people need to create a system that is "based on resources" so that there is "no competition", and then people can solve every problem with technology.

It argued that trying to change politics is useless, because in a "monetary system" everything is inherently corrupt, and supporting Ron Paul is particularly useless evidently.

Zeitgeist Addendum also wants everyone to give up their religions, so that the whole world can focus on the "collective cosmic conscience".

This is classic NWO propaganda.

For those of you who aren't aware, the international banksters financed the Bolshevik Revolution and created Communism, when Rothschild agent Jacob Schiff financed Leon Trotsky in New York.

This "resource-based technocratic utopia" tripe is just the latest version of the propaganda that they will use to create global fascism by manipulating all sides of civilization.

Please compare these forms of propaganda to the actual tenets of the original Bavarian Illuminati, which was established by Adam Weishaupt on May 1, 1776:

•Abolition of monarchies
•Abolition of ordered government
•Abolition of private property
•Abolition of nationalism
•Abolition of marriage
•Abolition of religion
•The communal education of children

NWO = Jesuits + Zionists + Knights of Malta

[JasonC]

this is why people who are very indoctrinated cant see documentaries like zeitgeist. because its like telling a christian that jesus is fake. look at the adrian post above. he completely twisted the whole plot. but is not his fault is that if he has a golf ball size concious after watching zeitgeist he ended up with a golf ball size understanding of the film.

I think Adrian's post was pretty darn accurate. He didn't get too deeply into the plot. It did have a notion of a one world government. Someone would have to be controlling the distribution of resources. I guess the leaders of the venus project would "lead" the way. He just pointed out some flaws in the arguments.

[humanic]

I had a feeling this one was going to drastically miss the mark. I skipped around and watched a few minutes earlier today and it seemed to be the case. I'll weigh in again when I finally get around to watching the whole thing.

[RJB]

this is why people who are very indoctrinated cant see documentaries like zeitgeist. because its like telling a christian that jesus is fake. look at the adrian post above. he completely twisted the whole plot. but is not his fault is that if he has a golf ball size concious after watching zeitgeist he ended up with a golf ball size understanding of the film.

You could also say that anyone who is very indoctrinated AGAINST religion would love to jump on this bandwagon.

My opinion of the movie's religious message is as follows: It takes faith to be a Christian. It takes a hell of a lot more faith to follow the "historical" suppositions presented in the movie.

[TGautier421]

Wow, the conspiracy nuts come out in droves when stuff like this is released. :rolleyes:

Let me just say this. I don't believe a one world government is inherently bad. In fact I feel the positives of a one world government FAR OUTWEIGH the negatives of one. But if we are truly moving towards a one world government, I feel its because of the banks and corporations moving us in that direction, which makes me fear for what they might have in store for us.

Let me just say this: a currency based on our available resources would definitely be the best way to trade. An ever changing value that is determined at any one time by the amount of resources we have and the speculation of what we could provide in the future. That would be the ultimate way of living within our means.

[Mini-Me]

Wow, the conspiracy nuts come out in droves when stuff like this is released. :rolleyes:

Let me just say this. I don't believe a one world government is inherently bad. In fact I feel the positives of a one world government FAR OUTWEIGH the negatives of one. But if we are truly moving towards a one world government, I feel its because of the banks and corporations moving us in that direction, which makes me fear for what they might have in store for us.


<facepalm>
The negatives of a one-world government FAR outweigh any negligible positives, no matter what era we are living in: Absolute power concentrated in a small number of hands that are very far away from the people being ruled. No matter how you slice it, centralization of power is the biggest and most dangerous problem humanity will ever face. If humanity ever reaches a position where centralized power does not inevitably entail tyranny, we will no longer need government at that point whatsoever, much less world government. I won't bother arguing this one further, since I've written many thousand words on it in many threads over the past year, and you can just look for previous threads I've participated in on one world government if you actually want to read my supporting arguments...but please, please reevaluate your position on this, because at the risk of being rude, I must say that you're just dead wrong.



Let me just say this: a currency based on our available resources would definitely be the best way to trade. An ever changing value that is determined at any one time by the amount of resources we have and the speculation of what we could provide in the future. That would be the ultimate way of living within our means.

You're being self-contradictory here, though you may have simply misspoke:
If the supply of money remains constant, its value then changes in accordance with demand for it, which is based on the market's evaluation of how scarce it is in comparison with other goods and services (which do change in supply - and demand).
If the supply is manipulated based on some central planner's (usually flawed) idea of the market's demand for it, the purpose is to maintain a constant value for the currency in comparison to some basket of goods and services.
However, there's no point in manipulating money to provide a variable value.

In any case, I don't understand what you mean by "That would be the ultimate way of living within our means." Are you referring to the government or to individuals? In any case, knowing how to live within our means has nothing to do with the value of the dollar (though prices indeed dictate what we can and cannot afford). It simply has to do with spending fewer dollars than we receive.

[danda]

Let me just say this: a currency based on our available resources would definitely be the best way to trade. An ever changing value that is determined at any one time by the amount of resources we have and the speculation of what we could provide in the future. That would be the ultimate way of living within our means.

Yes, maybe that would work, if the details could be ironed out.

But that's the problem with the film, and with what I found in 30 minutes of reading the Venus Project website.... they give zero details about how this resource based economy would actually work. There's just a bunch of hand-waving and BIG VISION.

BIG VISION is fine, but I don't believe we are yet very close to having the necessary tech for a non scarcity based economy. Now, if they demonstrated functioning prototypes of nano-assemblers and self-reproducing, self powered machines, that would be something.

[TGautier421]

<facepalm>
The negatives of a one-world government FAR outweigh any negligible positives, no matter what era we are living in: Absolute power concentrated in a small number of hands that are very far away from the people being ruled. No matter how you slice it, centralization of power is the biggest and most dangerous problem humanity will ever face. If humanity ever reaches a position where centralized power does not inevitably entail tyranny, we will no longer need government at that point whatsoever, much less world government. I won't bother arguing this one further, since I've written many thousand words on it in many threads over the past year, and you can just look for previous threads I've participated in on one world government if you actually want to read my supporting arguments...but please, please reevaluate your position on this, because at the risk of being rude, I must say that you're just dead wrong.



You're being self-contradictory here, though you may have simply misspoke:
If the supply of money remains constant, its value then changes in accordance with demand for it, which is based on the market's evaluation of how scarce it is in comparison with other goods and services (which do change in supply - and demand).
If the supply is manipulated based on some central planner's (usually flawed) idea of the market's demand for it, the purpose is to maintain a constant value for the currency in comparison to some basket of goods and services.
However, there's no point in manipulating money to provide a variable value.

In any case, I don't understand what you mean by "That would be the ultimate way of living within our means." Are you referring to the government or to individuals? In any case, knowing how to live within our means has nothing to do with the value of the dollar (though prices indeed dictate what we can and cannot afford). It simply has to do with spending fewer dollars than we receive.

tl;dr

I think you just see a one world government as inherently bad so I'm not even going to bother with this. The fact is a government that controlled the world could work very well. You don't have to reply to this post either, I wouldn't. :rolleyes:

[TGautier421]

Yes, maybe that would work, if the details could be ironed out.

But that's the problem with the film, and with what I found in 30 minutes of reading the Venus Project website.... they give zero details about how this resource based economy would actually work. There's just a bunch of hand-waving and BIG VISION.

BIG VISION is fine, but I don't believe we are yet very close to having the necessary tech for a non scarcity based economy. Now, if they demonstrated functioning prototypes of nano-assemblers and self-reproducing, self powered machines, that would be something.

Yeah, I'm just speaking about the big picture as well. I haven't even seen the new Zeitgeist so I wouldn't know what they were talking about in the film. I'm definately wouldn't be the one to try and start ironing out the details or such. I just feel that kind of economy would be the best.

[BarryDonegan]

funny the advocates of this stuff have such low post counts.

[Conza88]

tl;dr

I think you just see a one world government as inherently bad so I'm not even going to bother with this. The fact is a government that controlled the world could work very well. You don't have to reply to this post either, I wouldn't. :rolleyes:

You're a fucken idiot.

Pardon the french. :rolleyes:

[Mini-Me]

tl;dr

I think you just see a one world government as inherently bad so I'm not even going to bother with this. The fact is a government that controlled the world could work very well. You don't have to reply to this post either, I wouldn't. :rolleyes:

I do see a one world government as inherently bad: This isn't because it's impossible for it to ever have good policies or because none of its proponents could ever be benevolent (many are), but because, among other reasons, it will always be vulnerable to corruption of its purpose, just like any government...and since it's the most centralized a terrestrial government could possibly get, as well as being the farthest from the people, it's also more likely than any other type of government to become tyrannical in a hurry. The problem is that even if it doesn't start out bad, it will inevitably become bad over time. There's really no avoiding it indefinitely, and once it becomes tyrannical, it would be quite difficult to stop. Decentralization both decreases the risk of tyranny in any particular region and spreads it over multiple independent regions.

I understand why you're rejecting my argument ad hominem, since I haven't supported it whatsoever. Therefore, I will link to some posts where I have gone into significantly more detail. The earlier ones are weaker, and some of the later ones are stronger and more convincing:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=1229345&postcount=34
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=1318796&postcount=58
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=1492027&postcount=11
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=1503367&postcount=9
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=1520224&postcount=103
Actually, the thread I took the last two from is a pretty good thread to read from beginning to end. Hopefully one of these posts might help you to reconsider your position. (If, by the way, you believe that central economic planning by itself works, a la socialism or Communism, please let me know. I'll be happy to link to posts explaining why it doesn't. :rolleyes:)

[thechitowncubs]

At least I'm not the only one that realized this.

Zionist NWO "Agent": Lets release a film that harps on the fears of the public, and then promote a resource based utopia and tell everyone that they don't have to work or be an activist, all they have to do is change the "consciousness" of the people in order to be happy.

[TGautier421]

I'll read your posts later, because I'm about to go get drunk and hopefully find a hooker or two. I'm just saying, a world government, totally transparent, with total regulation over their authority provided by a very detailed and concise group of checks and balances, could do the world more good than bad. Of course it would have to be a neigh perfect system from the get go, but I just don't see how a situation like that could be bad, at all.

I won't go into detail, basically because this is the god damn Internet, and for a person like me to even try starting a philosophical debate over the subject would just be utterly pointless. And no, I don't believe in centralized economy or any of that shit.

I just think some of your guys' views are just naturally skewered, because of the depth some of you get into with this stuff. Like I've said in past posts, I am a very optimistic person. I see what these corrupt people are trying to accomplish, I just think they are going to fail miserably because their inherent plan is totally flawed, no matter how calculated and detailed their plans.

Some day, every single person on this planet is just going to wake up, and say "No." Its going to happen. Some of the people on this forum have these dystopia wet dreams; worlds like that are pure fantasy. Its just not natural. The world is very balanced, for every bad thing in the world there are plenty of good things. Some people need to just take a step back and realize this.

[JosephTheLibertarian]

Gautier, are you the same prick that banned me from freedomainradio? If not, sorry.

[Mini-Me]

I'll read your posts later, because I'm about to go get drunk and hopefully find a hooker or two. I'm just saying, a world government, totally transparent, with total regulation over their authority provided by a very detailed and concise group of checks and balances, could do the world more good than bad. Of course it would have to be a neigh perfect system from the get go, but I just don't see how a situation like that could be bad, at all.

I won't go into detail, basically because this is the god damn Internet, and for a person like me to even try starting a philosophical debate over the subject would just be utterly pointless. And no, I don't believe in centralized economy or any of that shit.

I just think some of your guys' views are just naturally skewered, because of the depth some of you get into with this stuff. Like I've said in past posts, I am a very optimistic person. I see what these corrupt people are trying to accomplish, I just think they are going to fail miserable because their inherent plan is totally flawed, no matter how calculated and detailed their plans.

Some day, every single person on this planet is just going to wake up, and say "No." Its going to happen. Some of the people on this forum have these dystopia wet dreams; worlds like that are pure fantasy. Its just not natural. The world is very balanced, for every bad thing in the world there are plenty of good things. Some people need to just take a step back and realize this.

I agree that some of the conspiracy-based stuff is pretty out there (Reptilians?!?), though not all of it, and it actually seems that you and I are on the same page on that. I also try to be a positive person, but I'm a very cautious person too. "Hope for the best, but prepare for the worst." In any case, based on this post, I think the last post I linked to might be the most convincing for you (maybe not, though). If nothing else, I'm definitely glad I don't have to write an anti-Communist manifesto again. ;)

The main point against world government, though, is that while extensive checks and balances certainly help bring systems "closer" to being foolproof, there are never any guarantees, and it's dangerous to rely so much on them that we ignore the potential consequences of what might happen if and when they're circumvented.

[TGautier421]

Gautier, are you the same prick that banned me from freedomainradio? If not, sorry.

Apology accepted. :confused:

[Carole]

We have not had true Capitalism and real free trade for decades.

What we have had is "managed" trade and pseudo-Capitalism. In other words, by interfering with the real Capitalism and true free trade, the money managers and power brokers have made it appear that Capitalism and free trade are evil.

It is always sleight of hand with them. They are very devious and evil and Draconian.

[JosephTheLibertarian]

Apology accepted. :confused:

You're not the same guy?

sorry. my bad. his name is very similar to yours

[Ken Iovino]

Definitely thought provoking. I visited the projects main website and instantly noticed that their research center is up for sale for $500k. I guess the project isn't going well if they have to sell their research center. I also did some searching on "Jacque Fresco" and found this (http://www.simpleology.com/training/drawing/). I guess he wants to teach people to draw, but I didn't see a price. After clicking the Visa logo, I got redirected to a paypal page that says the following:

Simpleology Great Teachers Series: Jacque Fresco Teaches Drawing
Free for the first month
Then $297.00 USD for one month

Something just doesn't feel right about this guy.

[Petar]

Definitely thought provoking. I visited the projects main website and instantly noticed that their research center is up for sale for $500k. I guess the project isn't going well if they have to sell their research center. I also did some searching on "Jacque Fresco" and found this (http://www.simpleology.com/training/drawing/). I guess he wants to teach people to draw, but I didn't see a price. After clicking the Visa logo, I got redirected to a paypal page that says the following:

Simpleology Great Teachers Series: Jacque Fresco Teaches Drawing
Free for the first month
Then $297.00 USD for one month

Something just doesn't feel right about this guy.

I'd like to know if those turds would like to give me all of their money if they think that it is just so evil.

Turds.

[Teenforpaul08]

Lol, you guys are as hostile as the next party supporters. And to think you're any different. Ron Paul is different. I guess he is the only difference in this society. People here have an agenda, people in McCain's camp have their agenda. No body really cares about others.

It's also funny that I made a similar thread and it got moved but here someone makes a thread bashing the movie and it gets to stay. Censorship much? And I thought we had enough of it during the primaries with Ron Paul. Might as well call this site, "Libertarian-minded only forums."

[BarryDonegan]

Lol, you guys are as hostile as the next party supporters. And to think you're any different. Ron Paul is different. I guess he is the only difference in this society. People here have an agenda, people in McCain's camp have their agenda. No body really cares about others.

It's also funny that I made a similar thread and it got moved but here someone makes a thread bashing the movie and it gets to stay. Censorship much? And I thought we had enough of it during the primaries with Ron Paul. Might as well call this site, "Libertarian-minded only forums."

you've made an excellent argument for this topic being moved to hot topics as well.

bad movie, should be in the topic area for bad, unrelated socialist movies.

[fatjohn]

you've made an excellent argument for this topic being moved to hot topics as well.

bad movie, should be in the topic area for bad, unrelated socialist movies.

Counterargument: It features Ron Paul!
An interview with Paul on fox isn't removed to hot topics either now is it?

[Alawn]

Counterargument: It features Ron Paul!
An interview with Paul on fox isn't removed to hot topics either now is it?

You do realize it specifically says at 1:04:30 not to vote for Ron Paul or people like him don't you?

[Conza88]

You do realize it specifically says at 1:04:30 not to vote for Ron Paul or people like him don't you?

No he didn't. He's too busy hating humanity & wishing all the producers in society were dead, but not the donut makers... fatjohn wouldn't like that. :rolleyes:

</ad hominem>

[Mini-Me]

Lol, you guys are as hostile as the next party supporters. And to think you're any different. Ron Paul is different. I guess he is the only difference in this society. People here have an agenda, people in McCain's camp have their agenda. No body really cares about others.

It's also funny that I made a similar thread and it got moved but here someone makes a thread bashing the movie and it gets to stay. Censorship much? And I thought we had enough of it during the primaries with Ron Paul. Might as well call this site, "Libertarian-minded only forums."

Contrary to your assertion, I do indeed care about people...but when it comes to politics, everyone has an agenda, and even you are not exempt. There's not inherently anything wrong with that - it all depends on what in particular each of our agendas are. That movie had an agenda as well, and the people "bashing" it are actually just trying to shed some light on what they believe the movie's agenda to be. Many of us here are very quick to point out that our current economic system is not free market capitalism, since that's such a common misconception. There really is reason to believe that it's constantly referred to as free market capitalism solely to provoke a reactionary shift toward a more collectivist/tyrannical system (e.g. socialism), which can then be implemented with the apparent consent of the people. It's classic manipulation, and I think a lot of people are disgusted by the video precisely because they're noticing it again and again. Also, religious people will naturally take offense at any anti-religious movie, but that's a fight I'll leave for the religious people. ;) I actually used to have some very socialist leanings, but after realizing how much I'd been misled, I've become very wary of all of the same anti-capitalist propaganda that worked its way into my head and was able to manipulate my thinking. I wrote some pretty long and even convincing diatribes against capitalism only a year-and-a-half ago or so, which I can now poke tons of logical and factual holes in today...but they seemed correct to me then. For the record, I went from a neocon as I was growing up, to briefly considering and rejecting libertarianism as I became disillusioned with the police state and warmongering, to a diehard liberal with socialist sympathies as I became appalled by our wealth gap, and finally to the way I think today. The only end of the 2-dimensional political spectrum I've never adhered to is the totalitarian statist end, corresponding to various collectivist ideologies like Communism, Nazism, totalitarian socialism East Germany style, etc. (They have their differences, but their great similarity is that the government has totalitarian authority over everything.) Considering all this, I think it's fair to say that I'm not some closed-minded idealogue who has never considered other belief sets or who wants to eat the babies of anyone who disagrees with me...I've certainly considered other ideas, and I've even argued for them. I can empathize with the people who think in those ways, even as frustrating as it can be trying to convince them to change their minds. It took me a long time before I was able to recognize all of my false assumptions, my naivete, my logical fallacies, how my emotions clouded my judgment, etc. Now, I just do my best to continue learning and to combat the same misconceptions I used to have.

Anyway, you mentioned that everyone here has an agenda, and you're right. Here, the prevailing agenda is freedom for all, though I suppose a lot of people might have some secondary agendas as well. In any case, freedom for all includes both economic and social/civil freedom, because they cannot be realistically separated without also giving the government the practical means and leverage to intrude once more on the other. When a movie comes out with some views contrary to personal liberty that people here find misleading and dangerous, I think it's pretty reasonable for us to call said movie out on its propaganda.

Still, there's something unique about libertarianism that other political ideologies do not share, and once you realize this I think you'll understand the "agenda" here a little bit better. Here's a quote I'd like to expound upon:

The difference between libertarianism and socialism is that libertarians will tolerate the existence of a socialist community, but socialists can't tolerate a libertarian community.
- David D. Boaz, 1997
Do you understand why this makes sense? Even if ALL government is libertarian at all levels, those who choose to come together, pool their resources, abolish their property rights with respect to each other, etc. can create enclaves of full-out Communism, and nobody will try to stop them. On the other hand, if the federal government is socialist, it will tax the hell out of every single person in the whole country and/or have the power to destroy their currency, even if a full 49% want absolutely no part of such a system.

Furthermore, if the federal government were libertarian with a strong emphasis on states' rights, the state governments could feasibly adopt whatever ideology their people wanted them to, even ideologies diametrically opposed to libertarianism. The more libertarian the federal government is, the truer this point becomes and the more people can live their lives the way they want without constant federal interference. Decentralization provides variety, and it also provides for competition between the various states for constituents willing to live in each. The Constitution - as it was originally written and when it is read the way the Framers intended (read the Federalist Papers for context) - is a primarily libertarian document, with a few extra powers granted to the government that are not entirely libertarian...but hell, I wouldn't complain much if we limited ourselves to just those. :p Granted, most of us here on these forums would probably also want a libertarian-style state and local government, but we'd have 50 different shots at that at the state level. However, if the federal government is socialist, Communist, fascist, or "whatever else" - all of which require gross infringements of the Constitution by the way - that becomes impossible. When I say "whatever else," I'm referring to our current two-party system, where the "conservative" camp is headed toward fascism but not there yet (i.e. Nazi-style national socialism), and the "liberal" camp is headed toward East Germany style regular socialism but not there yet.

Today, the federal government holds pretty much all of the political power in America. When the federal government adopts any ideology other than libertarianism, it takes powers for itself that are incompatible with the idea of federalism and decentralization of power. Because of this, the entire country will have to fall under that ideology, and nobody can "vote with their feet" to get away. If 51% of the people in America want full-on authoritarian fascism at the federal level, or really just 51% of those who vote, that's what everyone gets. A lot of people still fear the idea of states' rights and equate it with small-minded ideologies like racism, of course, but there's a transparent reason why the establishment encourages such fears.

Chipping away at federal totalitarianism and restoring limited Constitutional government would pretty much benefit everyone except the ruling elite. This is what makes the agenda here so different from the agenda in the McCain camp, the Obama camp, etc. They all want to rule the whole country in some particular way. We just want the government to stop ruling with an iron fist in the first place. We just want the government to return to its limited Constitutional roots so that we the people could be given more self-determination.

P.S. You made a comment about thread-moving and censorship. As far as I know, it's the moderators' policy to move all hardcore conspiracy-related threads to Hot Topics anyway, so I don't think yours was singled out. This one just got overlooked, it seems.

[chowdy]

This movie made me rage so hard. I watched it just to get pissed off, I think. Why did they say that socialism and capitalism are the same, yet get two retards almost literally reading from a utopian socialist script as a solution?

[Mini-Me]

This movie made me rage so hard. I watched it just to get pissed off, I think. Why did they say that socialism and capitalism are the same, yet get two retards almost literally reading from a utopian socialist script as a solution?

A form of doublespeak? ;)

[constituent]

lol, not this s* again.