vid of alex jones excoriating zeitgeist addendum

[evilfunnystuff]

i liked the first zeigeist but the second one has some bs in it

the guy who made it may be a plant or at the very least misguided


part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EyQtN4HY4Ko&feature=user

part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-fv16-DftRE&feature=related

part 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JR7ZfTmxBjE&feature=related

[V-rod]

Lets do a chip-in to get Alex Jones some psychiatric help.

[evilfunnystuff]

Lets do a chip-in to get Alex Jones some psychiatric help.

why what in ths vid makes him seem crazy to you

or are you just a general aj basher who generaly dislikes him and will slam him every chace u get

[Ben2008]

I always thought Alex Jones was really stupid, given his conspiracy theory stuff, but he's proved to me that he has some intelligence. He's right on the mark with his criticism. "Zeitgiest" is collectivist, and it's that philosophy we should fighting against. Michael Nystrom, proprietor of the DailyPaul posted this on his website and promoted it. Nystrom is clearly a socialist trying to corrupt the Ron Paul movement with collectivism and anti-capitalism.

[yongrel]

http://www.freemyspacegraphics.com/Graphics/Funny_Animations/images/66.gif

[qaxn]

it is impossible for many of you to agree with another person on something unless you agree with that person on everything, and that is why your brand of politics will never be put into practice, just fyi

e: all of you->many of you. it seems that there are yet some reasonable people willing to work with others to achieve mutually beneficial goals.

[Ben2008]

it is impossible for many of you to agree with another person on something unless you agree with that person on everything, and that is why your brand of politics will never be put into practice, just fyi

e: all of you->many of you. it seems that there are yet some reasonable people willing to work with others to achieve mutually beneficial goals.


Apparently you don't realize just how Dr. Paul's philosophy is fundamentally in opposition to the philosophy of this film. This film is collectivist. Dr. Paul is individualist. This film is against private ownership of the means of production, i.e. capitalism. Dr. Paul is for it. This film seeks a levelling of society so that no one is able to rise above another in wealth. Dr. Paul supports a society where people are allowed to become wealthier than others and unequal in socioeconomic stature as long as it's done through trade. This film seeks to abolish money. Dr. Paul seeks to bring real money into use. And so on. There is not much, if any common ground. The philosophy of this film is what we're supposed to be fighting against. And you don't have to agree with Ron Paul on everything, but if you believe with the basic philosophy of individualism which is the grounding of his philosophy then this film should be criticized and exposed for the garbage that it is.

[qaxn]

Apparently you don't realize just how Dr. Paul's philosophy is fundamentally in opposition to the philosophy of this film. This film is collectivist. Dr. Paul is individualist. This film is against private ownership of the means of production, i.e. capitalism. Dr. Paul is for it. This film seeks a levelling of society so that no one is able to rise above another in wealth. Dr. Paul supports a society where people are allowed to become wealthier than others and unequal in socioeconomic stature as long as it's done through trade. This film seeks to abolish money. Dr. Paul seeks to bring real money into use. And so on. There is not much, if any common ground. The philosophy of this film is what we're supposed to be fighting against. And you don't have to agree with Ron Paul on everything, but if you believe with the basic philosophy of individualism which is the grounding of his philosophy then this film should be criticized and exposed for the garbage that it is.

they recognize the serious problems of the current economic system
they are against state suppression of speech, privacy, due process, etc.

they do not need to be austrian school minarchist objectivist libertarians for them to be helpful allies in those two struggles.

[Ben2008]

they recognize the serious problems of the current economic system
they are against state suppression of speech, privacy, due process, etc.

they do not need to be austrian school minarchist objectivist libertarians for them to be helpful allies in those two struggles.


They're totally backwards. They blame private ownership of the means of production, the profit motive, and competition. The problem with our economy is government interference with private ownership, government interference with the profit motive, and government regulation preventing competition. We need MORE private ownership and control and more profit, and more competition. If you don't agree with this, then how can you even associate yourself with Ron Paul?

[Conza88]

it seems that there are yet some reasonable people willing to work with others to achieve mutually beneficial goals.

Socialism ain't one of them. ;)

[qaxn]

They're totally backwards. They blame private ownership of the means of production, the profit motive, and competition. The problem with our economy iss government interference with private ownership and government interference with the profit motive. We need MORE private ownership and control and more profit, and more competition. If you don't agree with this, then how can you even associate yourself with Ron Paul?

because pacifist unoppressive capitalists are a marked improvement over warmongering oppressive corporatists. i'm not looking for some crazy grand ideological struggle, i'm looking for a means to qualitatively improve the lives of all people. if you felt the same way, if you're in it because you think minimalist government and capitalism will make things right, and not because mises gives you a hardon, you'd agree.


Socialism ain't one of them. ;)
see: popular fronts

[shocker315]

http://www.freedom-force.org/freedomcontent.cfm?fuseaction=zeit_addendum&refpage=issues

[dannno]

They're totally backwards.

They just don't want a state because it is in the way of them working on their utopia... Ron Paul doesn't want interference in our lives either, and neither do they.. so they aren't totally backwards. They could live on their own within a free society.

I haven't seen any proof that they want to force their "totally backwards" philosophy on you or me.. and I'll bet if their society became as successful and abundant as they claim you would want to join it. I know I would, as long as I could leave any time I wanted.


I'm not advocating this portion of the film. I imagine I would probably trade things with people in a free society. I might not value some of the things I trade, and if they are valuable to society then I am essentially using a currency.

[Conza88]

see: popular fronts

See: A Layman's look at the Communist Manifesto (http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig/keller5.html)



They just don't want a state because it is in the way of them working on their utopia... Ron Paul doesn't want interference in our lives either, and neither do they.. so they aren't totally backwards. They could live on their own within a free society.

How many times do I have to say this? They want Anarcho-Commune (ism) / Socialism..

The system was practically the first ever social / political system. The Aboriginals had it for 40,000 years... they remained in the dirt & squalor, as nomads... the same with every other tribe out there... Because it contains Communism/Socialism... you know the abolition of all private property, no protection of those rights...

What these retards want to do, is go back to that system... regress back to a system pre-civilization... except use the tools created by civilization!

As soon as they adopt it, they will be leaching off the free market technology gained in every other single system that has it.

Should it choose not to, it will NOT PROGRESS one single step. If the ENTIRE world adopted this system, we, would, all, be, fucked.... No money, no private ownership of the means of production..


I haven't seen any proof that they want to force their "totally backwards" philosophy on you or me.. and I'll bet if their society became as successful and abundant as they claim you would want to join it. I know I would, as long as I could leave any time I wanted.

Not, gonna, happen. I wish them all the best, and go give it a shot... I just wish they would stfu with their bullshit fantasy propaganda. We don't need to hear this shit. :)


[U]I'm not advocating this portion of the film. I imagine I would probably trade things with people in a free society. I might not value some of the things I trade, and if they are valuable to society then I am essentially using a currency.

Ok, good then. :) Barter system, yeaaaaah never seen that one before.. :rolleyes:

[youngbuck]

The new Zeitgeist is utter hogwash:

http://www.freedom-force.org/freedomcontent.cfm?fuseaction=zeit_addendum&refpage=issues

[Ben2008]

You're right. Anarcho-communism is precisely what it is. And there is nothing "anarcho" about it, because it's the collective ruling over the individual.

[Conza88]

You're right. Anarcho-communism is precisely what it is. And there is nothing "anarcho" about it, because it's the collective ruling over the individual.

:) Indeed, the blind faith supporters don't see that though... they love to espouse "but there is no government, no state, no ruler" - an improvement some what, but it hardly changes the fact - the system contains communism / socialism, and THAT is exactly why the tribes remained in squalor, in a pre-civilized society that would see mankind walking around in the dirt still.... if it had remained as the constant political / social system.

They are practically Malthusians in terms of those who advocate a reduction in the human population; to where the environment is not affected by human civilization.. aka let's regress thousands of years.. :eek:

[revolutionary8]

http://www.freemyspacegraphics.com/Graphics/Funny_Animations/images/66.gif


funny,
that is how I see YOU Big DC.:p
shocker, huh?

perhaps it isn't THE TRUTHERS that give "us" a bad image, perhaps it is the POMP ASS PC ers?
nawww.
nawwwwwwwwwww....
nice "hood" by the way...

[Chibioz]

Jones makes some good points on this.

[TGautier421]

they recognize the serious problems of the current economic system
they are against state suppression of speech, privacy, due process, etc.

they do not need to be austrian school minarchist objectivist libertarians for them to be helpful allies in those two struggles.

Thank you.

[Antonius Stone]

a lot of the ideas they're pushing seems totally backwards, and I was REALLY put off by it at first, but after thinking on it some more, i realized some of the logic behind their arguments.

Everything they talk about in the last part about the "cure" to our problems revolves around Post-Scarcity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abundance_(economics)) (or abundance). Simply put, anything that occurs in abundance cannot be allocated by any kind of market because its basically free--sort of like breathable air is now. The free-market is absolutely the best way to allocate scarce resources. Given the current state of our technology now, I believe it is the most efficient economic system to use.

However, what if you live in a society where most all material goods are abundant and post-scarce? What if we had the technology to make everything Abundant? That's what this film posits, and if you look at it from that perspective, then a lot of what they argue for does make sense, because a market economy cannot allocate an abundant resource.

However, their criticism of the Profit Motive is fallacious because they don't properly understand what profit is. The profit motive will always exist in some form or another because profit is any gain that you get from making an investment. Nowadays, the most scarce (and therefore, most coveted) resources are material goods--cash, cars, gold, oil, etc. That's why our profits are measured in terms of these material goods.
However, in an economy where all of the aforementioned material stuff is abundant, then the material goods will cease to be profit. But profit will still exist, it will just evolve into some other medium.

Think about the Federation in Star Trek, which is basically a post-scarce society. They have replicators to make all the food, anti-matter power reactors and space ships that go at warp ten. They don't really have a monetary system, at least not from what I've seen. And if they do, its unlikely they use it for buying and selling trivial goods and services like food or transport. But even without money or a "market economy", the profit motive still exists--if it didn't then Starfleet wouldn't be traveling at warp 10 in all directions trying to explore the universe.
That's what I got out of Addendum. Not that the profit motive is bad, just in order for us to have a post-scarce society, then it would have to evolve. In a post-scarce society, I couldn't imagine material things as being the incentive that fuels the profit motive. I would imagine knowledge or some other intangible as the incentive that drives it.

The problem with their argument and their whole utopia scenario is that it hinges on the idea that we have the technology to make Energy post-scarce, something that sounds extremely farfetched to me. The whole talk of a 4,000mph Mag Lev and 6,000 Zeta Joules of power from geothermal...yeah right, i'm a bit skeptical. But if that is really possible, then I think a post-scarce society like that could potentially work.

[Ben2008]

a lot of the ideas they're pushing seems totally backwards, and I was REALLY put off by it at first, but after thinking on it some more, i realized some of the logic behind their arguments.

Everything they talk about in the last part about the "cure" to our problems revolves around Post-Scarcity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abundance_(economics)) (or abundance). Simply put, anything that occurs in abundance cannot be allocated by any kind of market because its basically free--sort of like breathable air is now. The free-market is absolutely the best way to allocate scarce resources. Given the current state of our technology now, I believe it is the most efficient economic system to use.

However, what if you live in a society where most all material goods are abundant and post-scarce? What if we had the technology to make everything Abundant? That's what this film posits, and if you look at it from that perspective, then a lot of what they argue for does make sense, because a market economy cannot allocate an abundant resource.

.....

If something is in unlimited supply, the market would not even be trying to allocate it. It would simply naturally be free, naturally.

It is logical to think that technology will make the necessities of life, but it will still not in UNLIMITED supply so these things will never be free. They'll just keep getting cheaper and cheaper, but never reach zero (i.e. it will take less and less work to obtain them) So there will always be a need for money, so we don't have to barter. And beyond necessities of life, humans have practically unlimited desires, so people will always be inventing things to make life more enjoyable. These will not be in unlimited supply, of course. And it will take money to purchase these.

The movie is pretty silly.

[constitutional]

http://www.freemyspacegraphics.com/Graphics/Funny_Animations/images/66.gif

That would be a sweet idea in a real James Bond movie.

[crackyflipside]

I didn't really like zeitgeist, then I saw the addendum movie and during some parts I felt sick to my stomach because what I was hearing was pure communist rhetoric. My family fled Cuba from 'communism' this is the utopia they heard was going to be brought to them, I've been taught all my life to beware of this.

[stilltrying]

let them do whatever they want in their neck of the woods and if they try using force on others to make them be a part of this system then it is done through force and collectivism in which case I want no part of it. one persons utopia is another persons nightmare. NO THANKS ZEITGEIST/COMMUNISM

[qaxn]

George Orwell was a socialist, clearly we should stop recommending and referencing 1984. After all, Atlas Shrugged is all the sheeple need to wake up, am I right, guys?

[Danke]

AJ interviewed the maker of the film today. I didn't catch much of it, but at the end AJ was really going off on the guy (in a bad way).

[Penners]

I really loved the first Zeitgeist.... didn't care much for the 2nd one. However, I was disappointed in Alex's behavior today. He went berzerk while the producer of Zeitgeist remained calm even as he confronted Alex on interrupting and basically acting like an ass.

[dannno]

AJ interviewed the maker of the film today. I didn't catch much of it, but at the end AJ was really going off on the guy (in a bad way).

youtube someone pleeeez

[Conza88]

I really loved the first Zeitgeist.... didn't care much for the 2nd one. However, I was disappointed in Alex's behavior today. He went berzerk while the producer of Zeitgeist remained calm even as he confronted Alex on interrupting and basically acting like an ass.

I would love to interview that F$@K... Futuristic wannabe marxism by stealth FTFL.

[pacelli]

I really loved the first Zeitgeist.... didn't care much for the 2nd one. However, I was disappointed in Alex's behavior today. He went berzerk while the producer of Zeitgeist remained calm even as he confronted Alex on interrupting and basically acting like an ass.

I hate Zeitgeist and I normally agree with Alex, but he was too far over the top today in the interview, which I watched on prisonplanet.tv. He continually interrupted the guy, didn't let him complete many sentences, and generally derailed the conversation into stupid arguments (i.e. why charge 29.95 for my conspiracy videos as opposed to 30.00) to prevent the guy from making any significant point.

Alex hyped this interview up all last week and this week, and said it wouldn't be a hostile interview, but he definitely started ranting and raving on the guy. Alex even made some kind of comment about people in competition with him in terms of trying to take people from his listeners. Really bizarre and way out of character, I don't know if Alex felt threatened by Zeitgeist or not but with all the crap Alex talks about not getting into petty arguments and bringing people together in the truth movement, he sure disproved himself today.

The discussion turned into a debate about Nature (Alex's side) vs. Nuture (zeitgeist's side).

I don't have a youtube nor do I care to see it or hear it again. Once was enough.

[Conza88]

I hate Zeitgeist and I normally agree with Alex, but he was too far over the top today in the interview, which I watched on prisonplanet.tv. He continually interrupted the guy, didn't let him complete many sentences, and generally derailed the conversation into stupid arguments (i.e. why charge 29.95 for my conspiracy videos as opposed to 30.00) to prevent the guy from making any significant point.

Alex hyped this interview up all last week and this week, and said it wouldn't be a hostile interview, but he definitely started ranting and raving on the guy. Alex even made some kind of comment about people in competition with him in terms of trying to take people from his listeners. Really bizarre and way out of character, I don't know if Alex felt threatened by Zeitgeist or not but with all the crap Alex talks about not getting into petty arguments and bringing people together in the truth movement, he sure disproved himself today.

The discussion turned into a debate about Nature (Alex's side) vs. Nuture (zeitgeist's side).

I don't have a youtube nor do I care to see it or hear it again. Once was enough.

So it'd be in the wednesday labelled podcast? About what time you recon?

[Fox McCloud]

I listened today and was fully disgusted with the Zeitgeist guy, but would fully admit Alex was being a bit of a jerk.

The guy didn't seem to have any idea or sort of moral code about him...he didn't accept the concept that evil existed, yet at the same time, he labeled certain actions as "bad". The fallacy there is if you admit that, then you pretty much set the basis that your own ideas and ideals could merely be "taught" to you, as well.

Also, his whole "no money" thing was completely ridiculous....without money, no one would have any incentive to do anything (ok, trade...but that brings along its own problems...it's impossible to quantify wealth, profit, or loss)...

Alex shouldn't have been a jerk, yes...but the Zeitgeist guy's philosophy and methodology of thinking was totally irrational, not to mention it didn't fully make logical sense.

[Conza88]

I listened today and was fully disgusted with the Zeitgeist guy, but would fully admit Alex was being a bit of a jerk.

The guy didn't seem to have any idea or sort of moral code about him...he didn't accept the concept that evil existed, yet at the same time, he labeled certain actions as "bad". The fallacy there is if you admit that, then you pretty much set the basis that your own ideas and ideals could merely be "taught" to you, as well.

Also, his whole "no money" thing was completely ridiculous....without money, no one would have any incentive to do anything (ok, trade...but that brings along its own problems...it's impossible to quantify wealth, profit, or loss)...

Alex shouldn't have been a jerk, yes...but the Zeitgeist guy's philosophy and methodology of thinking was totally irrational, not to mention it didn't fully make logical sense.

Yeah, will have to listen to it.. frustrates me that Alex appears to have lost his cool?

When faced with irrationality... he lost his cool? That'd NEVER happen to me! :D

So yeah, I defs understand where he is coming from.... Hahaha.. doesn't mean he's wrong.. but it tends to appear that way, and it's especially ain't attractive - when you are meant to be interviewing someone... lmao.. and representing a movement.. :eek:

Sooo sick of this addendum bullshit.

[Hiki]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pC--9zclwNk&feature=user

It's on youtube now.

Fucking hell, AJ really loses it in the 4/4 part. One loud-mouthed motherfucker, no offense. He keeps interrupting Joseph all the time and especially towards the end he starts screaming and I can really imagine how drool is flying around the room. It's adorable how Joseph keeps his cool during the interview, I would've probably walked out already.
He also keeps repeating Joseph's arguments in that "Eric Cartman"-style, if you know what I mean.

E: Alex Jones is like the Bill O' Reilly of the truth movement.

[Conza88]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pC--9zclwNk&feature=user

It's on youtube now.

Fucking hell, AJ really loses it in the 4/4 part. One loud-mouthed motherfucker, no offense. He keeps interrupting Joseph all the time and especially towards the end he starts screaming and I can really imagine how drool is flying around the room. It's adorable how Joseph keeps his cool during the interview, I would've probably walked out already.
He also keeps repeating Joseph's arguments in that "Eric Cartman"-style, if you know what I mean.

E: Alex Jones is like the Bill O' Reilly of the truth movement.

"Adorable?" - :eek: wtf kind of adjective is that to use about someone whose advocates the demise of civilization? :rolleyes: (unknowingly... :confused: ) Anarcho-Commune (ism) we've been down this path.. :rolleyes:

Alex knows the basics... economic freedom = good. As for the intricacies of Austrian Economics... no, he doesn't... Nor is it his job too.

How about the addendum dude go on Lewrockwell podcast.. get interviewed by Lew Rockwell.... See who gets their marxist veiled bullshit smashed out of town... :)

[Hiki]

"Adorable?" - :eek: wtf kind of adjective is that to use about someone whose advocates the demise of civilization? :rolleyes: (unknowingly... :confused: ) Anarcho-Commune (ism) we've been down this path.. :rolleyes:

Alex knows the basics... economic freedom = good. As for the intricacies of Austrian Economics... no, he doesn't... Nor is it his job too.

How about the addendum dude go on Lewrockwell podcast.. get interviewed by Lew Rockwell.... See who gets their marxist veiled bullshit smashed out of town... :)

I wouldn't call the current world order "civilized", far from it. For the record, yes I would like to see the demise of the current system and a new world order to rise :)

Well please do try and get him on LR. Either contact Joseph or LR.

[Conza88]

I wouldn't call the current world order "civilized", far from it. For the record, yes I would like to see the demise of the current system and a new world order to rise :)

Well please do try and get him on LR. Either contact Joseph or LR.

Freedom is new, tyranny is old.

If the system you want is anarcho-commune (ism) which is stakly evident in everything he proposes... then it's the very OLDEST...

;)

This world ain't civilized because it's become more & MORE socialistic. What do you expect? The market is struggling more than ever now because of govt & state intervention....

The Second American Revolution was the 2nd step... of Freedom. Magna Carta was the first... and no we've got to make the 3rd one :cool:

[Hiki]

Freedom is new, tyranny is old.

If the system you want is anarcho-commune (ism) which is stakly evident in everything he proposes... then it's the very OLDEST...

;)

This world ain't civilized because it's become more & MORE socialistic. What do you expect? The market is struggling more than ever now because of govt & state intervention....

The Second American Revolution was the 2nd step... of Freedom. Magna Carta was the first... and no we've got to make the 3rd one :cool:

No, the world isn't civilized because the whole system is based on competition and profit which breeds corruption, greed, selfishness and various other behavioral models which make up the world today. Very often people have the opportunity to do good, but instead the question is asked "What's in it for me?".
A completely free enterprise/market is never going to happen nor last. It will corrupt itself in the end and the same old wheel keeps rolling what we're looking at now.

Besides free market is not always the only solution. For example, if truly freemarket principals were brought up into Namibia now, the people there would go bankrupt. In Namibia the government is protecting domestic farmers (majority of the people) from European businesses by preventing foreign entrepreneurs from entering the market before domestic farmers have sold their crop. The EU is pressuring the Namibian gov to "free up" the market which would of course result in the total destruction of domestic farming as there is no way that the people there are able to compete with European mass-production.
So we shouldn't make up our mind before we hit an issue. It's great how passionate you are about your ideologies and labels but it's not the right thing always everywhere.

And it's sad how you dismiss an whole idea just because you can throw a label on it which you dont agree with.

[Conza88]

No, the world isn't civilized because the whole system is based on competition and profit which breeds corruption, greed, selfishness and various other behavioral models which make up the world today. Very often people have the opportunity to do good, but instead the question is asked "What's in it for me?".

Well well well, the marxist comes out of the closet. :rolleyes: I love it how you've simply regurgitated practically everything you heard Joesph say in the interview. Unlike Alex but... I know a bit more Austrian economics.. ;)

Can't you just admit it though, be brave now.. :)


A completely free enterprise/market is never going to happen nor last. It will corrupt itself in the end and the same old wheel keeps rolling what we're looking at now.

The American Revolution. Do you understand it's significance? Do you really? Because I don't think you do. What intervened in the free markets Hiki, what did mate? It was the state & government... It will last when there isn't a state. Educate yourself, young one. The reason the American Experiment failed, was because the state was allowed to exist.


Besides free market is not always the only solution. For example, if truly freemarket principals were brought up into Namibia now, the people there would go bankrupt. In Namibia the government is protecting domestic farmers (majority of the people) from European businesses by preventing foreign entrepreneurs from entering the market before domestic farmers have sold their crop. The EU is pressuring the Namibian gov to "free up" the market which would of course result in the total destruction of domestic farming as there is no way that the people there are able to compete with European mass-production.

State & government intervention again.............................. ;)


So we shouldn't make up our mind before we hit an issue. It's great how passionate you are about your ideologies and labels but it's not the right thing always everywhere.

And it's sad how you dismiss an whole idea just because you can throw a label on it which you dont agree with.

I came to Addendum like I do with most things, with an open mind.. that's also switched on to detect bullshit. Remember.. 8 months ago, I was a Chomskyite socialist.. Well, my mind detected and confirmed, just like G.Edward Griffin's brain did - an intense amount of bullshit.

Yours isn't working. I suggest you get it repaired.. or chipped. Which ever. ;)

It's sad, you are so blind... and so naive.

[RonPaulR3VOLUTION]

So, what happens in this Zeitgeist Addendumb society when someone spends some of their new free time on making on amazing piece of music that they distribute which becomes very popular? Then someone else will want to share in the fame by making their own song which is even more popular! Uh-oh, competition is back! Now people will just start competing for things like fame! How do you stop that one?

Here's how:

"THE YEAR WAS 2081, and everybody was finally equal. They weren’t only equal before God and the law. They were equal every which way. Nobody was smarter than anybody else. Nobody was better looking than anybody else. Nobody was stronger or quicker than anybody else. All this equality was due to the 211th, 212th, and 213th Amendments to the Constitution, and to the unceasing vigilance of agents of the United States Handicapper General."
http://instruct.westvalley.edu/lafave/hb.html
http://www.FinallyEqual.com


Money can be a means to compete, but it is hardly the source of human competition. Humans will always compete, absent technology turning them into mindless drones, even in such things as simple as skipping rocks and seeing who can spit the farthest. Have fun in your utopia trying to ban singing, dancing, running, dating, exercising, education, sports in general, and et cetera. All of those things and much more can be, and are, used to compete.

Where it is possible for differences to exist, competition is eternal.

Zeitgeist Addendumb is certainly not utopia for me.

All of that aside, the only* way to even attempt to build this robot-filled utopia is through the free market...

*Perhaps not the only way, but you will have a heck of a time getting there with a socialist/communist system.

[speech]

I had a problem with censorship with all the Paul sites, Im not anywhere close to a socialist so It might be true,

One banned me for bringing up sovereignty, it was overwhelming newbies. one banned me for linking to other PAUL sites, whoops I thought this was a group effort.

There is defiantly globalization hints in Addendum. I really dont like the venus project. Anything that puts the power in the hands of a few is a no to me

[pacelli]

So it'd be in the wednesday labelled podcast? About what time you recon?

It's right here, slow site but should load up for ya: http://justgetthere.us/blog/archives/Alex-Jones-Heated-Interview-with-Peter-Joseph-of-Zeitgeist.html

[Pistis]

There is no such thing/concept as 'evil' (except religion and Christianity especially ); :confused:

...human beings have no aggresive/competitive instincts; (apart from our conditioning) :confused:

...we are 90% nuture, 10% nature; (just plain wrong)

...the scientific method (i.e. technology) will save the world by reconditioning humanity under a centralized power structure (So what happens if i don't want to be reconditioned?) :eek:

...humans don't need an incentive to produce and exchange, in fact we don't need money :confused:


Ok, when you hear someone spouting all this crazy stuff above, what's a man to do. So I didn't particularly enjoy how Alex handled the interview but I can't really blame him. He was talking to a delusional, fantasist who is self-evidently out of touch with reality.

[Defining Obscene]

I like the pseudo-patriots complaining that its the government's fault for corrupting the free market, but bash people for saying we need to get rid of government. You're on the same team.


As far as Zeitgeist is concerned, it contained the seeds of a few things we need to let into our mind, and plenty of seeds we need to never be planted. A scientific rule cannot, and will not happen. Sure, theres sheep out there, and theres religious sheep too; there is too much friction for such a system to be accepted as a whole. Not to mention there is probably too much room for anti-human behavior.


But what we do need to take from this, is that there is another way... We don't have to accept what he proposed, and I certainly don't, but we absolutely must find another way to function as a society. In order for something like that to happen, we must all come to find new truths. New truths that allow us to work in such a way that we don't need a monetary system or governing power. If you want to get rid of evil, cut it off at the knees, money can no longer be used as leverage over other people. The farce of "people earning their money" is laughable at best. The top 1% never worked a day in their lives, and they make money simply for having money. How can you expect a monetary system to work if there is a black hole that grows every single day, eating more and more of the "pie"? If you really prescribe to this system and call it the best we can come up with, then you are either extremely wealthy, or extremely dumb.

Note, that is NOT a call for communism or socialism, it is simply the truth that you will never have what they have, they will never concern themselves with you, and they can forever build their fortune off of your labor - without giving you an equal right to the earnings. Capitalism is legally-imbalanced communism. I don't like saying that, it sucks. But you have to realize that this is a 200 year old experiment and we are WITNESSING its outcome. Why live in denial? There is nothing wrong with accepting something that conflicts with what you previously held dear. It broadens your understanding.


If you listen to Ron Paul, what does he always say? We treat the symptoms, but not the problem. What is the problem? Ultimately, it is the government and money. Money gives you power, power to run for president, power to squash other people's personal power (monopolies/duopolies, legislation), and government is the shortcut for all of that. Exploit the laws, write new ones, take payments, leave wealthier than you came. No wonder there are power hungry people out there huh? Its kind of ironic that we promote these false "American" ideals but watch as Ron Paul gets snuffed off to the side, and we continue to say that its just the government. I digress.


We need to find a new way. We cannot save this country, this financial collapse is happening for a reason. These governments are being exposed for a reason. Take a clue, people. We need to seal the deal and just let it go, there has to be another way, and with human ingenuity, we will find it, and perfect it.

For those of you who hate Obama, I don't like the guy either, but he is exposing a very wide open hole in our system that needs to be addressed one way or the other. If McCain ain't gonna do it, then you know Barack will. He might (and probably will) prescribe the wrong medication for this problem, but to go against the idea that there is a problem at all, simply because Barack is using it to his advantage, is ignorance in its highest form.

We have to do something, and thats the bottom line. Something has to change, and we need to take this experiment as a lesson.

[Conza88]

As far as Zeitgeist is concerned, it contained the seeds of a few things we need to let into our mind, and plenty of seeds we need to never be planted. A scientific rule cannot, and will not happen. Sure, theres sheep out there, and theres religious sheep too; there is too much friction for such a system to be accepted as a whole. Not to mention there is probably too much room for anti-human behavior.

So can you actually name those "seeds" you talk about... :rolleyes:


But what we do need to take from this, is that there is another way... We don't have to accept what he proposed, and I certainly don't, but we absolutely must find another way to function as a society. In order for something like that to happen, we must all come to find new truths. New truths that allow us to work in such a way that we don't need a monetary system or governing power.

Another way? Yes = FREEDOM! you tool. Please propose your solution? :confused: Robots right? :p NEW truths?

"Tyranny is old. Freedom is NEW..." - Ron Paul

Read this: http://www.dailypaul.com/node/69233 .. because you are ignorant. It's ok though; you can get help - it's called Knowledge - and it's contained within Ron Paul's books... Gold, Peace & Prosperity by Ron Paul; Pillars of Prosperity by Ron Paul - (Free Markets, Honest Money, Private Property) etc.... :D


If you want to get rid of evil, cut it off at the knees, money can no longer be used as leverage over other people. The farce of "people earning their money" is laughable at best. The top 1% never worked a day in their lives, and they make money simply for having money. How can you expect a monetary system to work if there is a black hole that grows every single day, eating more and more of the "pie"? If you really prescribe to this system and call it the best we can come up with, then you are either extremely wealthy, or extremely dumb.

Ignorance is piss. Educate yourself. The monetary system we've got at the moment is communistic. Central banks mate; 5th plank of the Communist Manifesto. Get a clue ;) Free market in money... GOLD STANDARD. If you don't get that, you are extremely ignorant - and if you don't take steps to educate yourself, you are extremely dumb.


Note, that is NOT a call for communism or socialism, it is simply the truth that you will never have what they have, they will never concern themselves with you, and they can forever build their fortune off of your labor - without giving you an equal right to the earnings. Capitalism is legally-imbalanced communism. I don't like saying that, it sucks. But you have to realize that this is a 200 year old experiment and we are WITNESSING its outcome. Why live in denial? There is nothing wrong with accepting something that conflicts with what you previously held dear. It broadens your understanding.

Note; it is a call for socialism & communism, you're just refraining from naming it. Or as I believe, you don't actually know it.. what you are advocating... lmao. Pretty sad. :( Jesus christ you're a tool. Capitalism is legally imbalanced communism? You're a fucken idiot. Communism is collectivism. Fascism is collectivism. Corporatism is fascism. Capitalism is INDIVIDUALISM. What part do you not get? :rolleyes:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SvhKOsn-0AY


If you listen to Ron Paul, what does he always say? We treat the symptoms, but not the problem. What is the problem? Ultimately, it is the government and money. Money gives you power, power to run for president, power to squash other people's personal power (monopolies/duopolies, legislation), and government is the shortcut for all of that. Exploit the laws, write new ones, take payments, leave wealthier than you came. No wonder there are power hungry people out there huh? Its kind of ironic that we promote these false "American" ideals but watch as Ron Paul gets snuffed off to the side, and we continue to say that its just the government. I digress.

The problem is the state, collectivism. The problem is socialism. You have no concept of what money actually is. It's purpose. You fail remarkably.


For those of you who hate Obama, I don't like the guy either, but he is exposing a very wide open hole in our system that needs to be addressed one way or the other. If McCain ain't gonna do it, then you know Barack will. He might (and probably will) prescribe the wrong medication for this problem, but to go against the idea that there is a problem at all, simply because Barack is using it to his advantage, is ignorance in its highest form.

We have to do something, and thats the bottom line. Something has to change, and we need to take this experiment as a lesson.

Who the f---k do you think you are talking to? :confused: Ron Paul supporters mate... you're suggesting we (collective - lol) don't think there is a problem?

Completely retarded. Mate, we've already experimented with what this bullshit suggests.. Abolition of property. ;) Abolition of money would follow the same suit. Both Marxist ideology.

You really need help, you're a very lost individual. :)

[Ben2008]

I would love to interview that F$@K... Futuristic wannabe marxism by stealth FTFL.

Yeah, if Jones was smarter he really could have tore that guy down.

The guy was saying competition is bad, but then he would say that scarcity necessitates us being competitive in order to survive. Well, I have news for him, resources are limited. So how can what's necessary to do to live be bad?

And he said competitive drive is not genetic. I would ask him how he explain people who like to play chess. If elimination of the competitive drive is what he wants, then there are a lot of games and sports that would be eliminated a long with it. What he's missing is that some of us actually enjoy competition, and will choose to do it anyway even if it's not necessary to survive. Some of us would choose not to eliminate our own competitive spirit even if we could.

[Defining Obscene]

I'm not even going to respond to that, you used every other sentence as an opportunity to call me ignorant and retarded. Way to use your freedom, asshole. Good luck building your movement, I hope you manage to "FREE THE SHIT" out of all these ignorant people who are less than you, cause you certainly gained my support.

Oh by the way, money is debt. We're all in debt. Yea, I don't know what money is. You can live in debt, fine by me. Go chase that debt. Yea I don't know about RP, thats why I'm here, I don't read, I only read the Revolution Manifesto. Listen to you spout shit and then call someone else an idiot. You're just so into yourself aren't you? Again, enjoy living in your own world where that dollar will be used against you over and over again.

[H Roark]

And he said competitive drive is not genetic. I would ask him how he explain people who like to play chess. If elimination of the competitive drive is what he wants, then there are a lot of games and sports that would be eliminated a long with it. What he's missing is that some of us actually enjoy competition, and will choose to do it anyway even if it's not necessary to survive. Some of us would choose not to eliminate our own competitive spirit even if we could.

Great points. Can't wait to hear the calls once they bring back Joseph on the air to answer calls...

[Conza88]

I'm not even going to respond to that, you used every other sentence as an opportunity to call me ignorant and retarded. Way to use your freedom, asshole. Good luck building your movement, I hope you manage to "FREE THE SHIT" out of all these ignorant people who are less than you, cause you certainly gained my support.

Oh by the way, money is debt. We're all in debt. Yea, I don't know what money is. You can live in debt, fine by me. Go chase that debt. Yea I don't know about RP, thats why I'm here, I don't read, I only read the Revolution Manifesto. Listen to you spout shit and then call someone else an idiot. You're just so into yourself aren't you? Again, enjoy living in your own world where that dollar will be used against you over and over again.

You won't respond, because you can't... ;) In every sentence, I rebutt the bs you are defending.. then I call you ignorant in the other, yeah so what :confused: it's a statement of FACT, it is the truth. You are ignorant on what money is. I'm not calling you stupid, I'm just pointing out you have no idea what you are talking about. Now you can change that, by educating yourself - OR you CAN be stupid, and remain willfully ignorant. It's up to you.. :p

Thanks for admitting your ignorance. :) You are your own worst enemy. Go read the books mentioned in the Daily Paul link, I posted to you. PDF's online.. audio versions aswell... "What has government done to our money?" By Murray Rothbard...

Don't get mad at me, because I tell it like it is. I'm doing you a favour, go study the material and come back and prove me wrong.. ;)

A GOLD standard (REAL MONEY) you know, chosen by the free market - is not debt. The sooner you understand that, the sooner you'll realise the piece of Bullshit you've been defending is a joke and outright marxist crap.

:D

[Defining Obscene]

You won't respond, because you can't... ;) In every sentence, I rebutt the bs you are defending.. then I call you ignorant in the other, yeah so what :confused: it's a statement of FACT, it is the truth. You are ignorant on what money is. I'm not calling you stupid, I'm just pointing out you have no idea what you are talking about. Now you can change that, by educating yourself - OR you CAN be stupid, and remain willfully ignorant. It's up to you.. :p

Thanks for admitting your ignorance. :) You are your own worst enemy. Go read the books mentioned in the Daily Paul link, I posted to you. PDF's online.. audio versions aswell... "What has government done to our money?" By Murray Rothbard...

Don't get mad at me, because I tell it like it is. I'm doing you a favour, go study the material and come back and prove me wrong.. ;)

A GOLD standard (REAL MONEY) you know, chosen by the free market - is not debt. The sooner you understand that, the sooner you'll realise the piece of Bullshit you've been defending is a joke and outright marxist crap.

:D

Yeah, you try to attach my views to Zeitgeist, then call me a communist. You're like Bill O'reilly trying find the worst of things to attach to people who don't even support those ideas. Now if you want to engage in respectful conversation, like a forum should be, then please be courteous, instead of saying I'm full of BS. I'm not going to respond to someone who calls me an ignorant retard every other sentence, then says I can't respond because I'm full of shit. Your preconceived notion has built yourself into a box where you have to insult other people to hold it together. If you think thats really freedom, you can have it. But I'm done defending myself on that point.

You're telling me to read books? Do you think I live in a cardboard box on the street? Who do you think you are, pal? I know about Ron Paul, I used to support this whole charade because I believed in it. I believed in the free market, I believed in sound money, and I believed in the constitution. But heres where you are making some absurd notions... You think I don't believe in freedom? Please show me where I said I don't endorse freedom? Please show me where I said I support socialism and a pseudo-scientific government? It doesn't exist because I don't. I didn't like where Zeitgeist went, and I made that clear in the very first paragraph in the original post.

Listen, the best way to deceive someone is by mixing the truth with the lies. If you're a good fish, you can get the bait without getting hooked. This is what Zeitgeist is, and most mainstream media is. No shit, Zeitgeist is basically NWO gummy bears for kids. But before you went on a tirade of calling me a handicapped marxist, you should have paid attention to the fact that I said that there has to be another way.

You know who Ron Paul is? He has the mind of a founding father. Our nation and constitution was created by a whole group of Ron Pauls. Now explain to me how something so perfect, could get corrupted over time, and yet you accept it as perfect? Even Thomas Jefferson made it perfectly clear...

"Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny."
-Thomas Jefferson


Did you read that? Read it again. I'm not going to go ask you to read 10 books and come back because you're a retard, just read that 1 quote. He said, no matter what, government is going to be corrupted. You can talk all day about restoring the constitution, but a government and a society driven by money (GOLD OR NOT!) is going to be in it for their own benefit. And for a long time, we've accepted that as the best system we could come up with... Because it WAS. If you want to start all over again, just to be corrupted in the future as Jefferson correctly hypothesized, then you are literally throwing time away. We have to change if we want to continue to become better people in this world. There is no dollar amount that makes you a better person. Do you think it is ethical that a person owns 10 billion dollars? Honestly, answer that. Is it ETHICAL? Do you think I'm attacking freedom when I say we could all stand to be a little more ETHICAL? Really? That is the new truth I was referring to. We have no ethics in this society, and we are always going to be plagued by it until this all falls apart. It doesn't matter if there is gold backing a dollar bill or not, unethical behavior is tearing us all down, and hiding under the flag of capitalism, just as it has always hidden under every other tyrannical flag. You seriously can't blame everyone's behavior and all the ills that the people of this nation, and the whole world face, on the fact that there is no gold standard. People who bust their asses aren't going to be any happier getting minimum wage in gold, or fiat paper.


I hate communism, I hate the government, and I want nothing to do with them. The government cannot give us anything we don't already have, except understanding through error. We all need to learn to become more ethical, not "re-educated" like you think I need to be (re-educated, thats NWO speak). Ethics will be learned the hard way. All this corruption, pain, and suffering that is coming, will not leave without a new understanding of what it means to be ethical in this world.

And if you think I'm such a stupid moron for saying these things, then thats your prerogative.

[Conza88]

Yeah, you try to attach my views to Zeitgeist, then call me a communist. You're like Bill O'reilly trying find the worst of things to attach to people who don't even support those ideas. Now if you want to engage in respectful conversation, like a forum should be, then please be courteous, instead of saying I'm full of BS. I'm not going to respond to someone who calls me an ignorant retard every other sentence, then says I can't respond because I'm full of shit. Your preconceived notion has built yourself into a box where you have to insult other people to hold it together. If you think thats really freedom, you can have it. But I'm done defending myself on that point.

You say you are against it at the start yes, but then all you do is go on and DEFEND the movie and it's subverted ideas. Well all I'm doing is DEFENDING the truth, logic and reason - the movie is clinically retarded. Ok, you agree? Good - then stop defending it indirectly.


You're telling me to read books? Do you think I live in a cardboard box on the street? Who do you think you are, pal? I know about Ron Paul, I used to support this whole charade because I believed in it. I believed in the free market, I believed in sound money, and I believed in the constitution. But heres where you are making some absurd notions... You think I don't believe in freedom? Please show me where I said I don't endorse freedom? Please show me where I said I support socialism and a pseudo-scientific government? It doesn't exist because I don't. I didn't like where Zeitgeist went, and I made that clear in the very first paragraph in the original post.

I'm telling you to read books, that would correct the retarded direction you're going it. You want a new direction, some NEW way? Yeah - it is called capitalism, free markets, no state government intervention, free enterprise, a free market in money, no central banks, no fiat currency, sound money, no welfare state, individualism not collectvism, social freedoms combined with economic freedoms. That is all NEW, that is the ONLY way. Tyranny is OLD, freedom is NEW... ;)

So don't strawman me. You talk in past tense,"I used to support this whole charade because I believed in it. I believed in the free market, I believed in sound money, and I believed in the constitution."

And I'm calling you a retard for not believing in it ANYMORE. And it appears this movie is what moved you from those beliefs? Right? If not, then what? :rolleyes:


Listen, the best way to deceive someone is by mixing the truth with the lies. If you're a good fish, you can get the bait without getting hooked. This is what Zeitgeist is, and most mainstream media is. No shit, Zeitgeist is basically NWO gummy bears for kids. But before you went on a tirade of calling me a handicapped marxist, you should have paid attention to the fact that I said that there has to be another way.

Ok good, thank you for understanding it's bs. It's a pity you've fallen for it's biggest trap though. What is this dreamland other way? :) I think you may be looking for anarcho-capitalism... as it really is that way.. but you've stopped believing in free markets.. which is retarded. Socialism vs Capitalism - is NOT a false dichotomy... the OWNERSHIP of production; private or public. That's it. Can you improve upon that? :rolleyes: Capitalism is the way, you are looking for. You've just been side tracked.


You know who Ron Paul is? He has the mind of a founding father. Our nation and constitution was created by a whole group of Ron Pauls. Now explain to me how something so perfect, could get corrupted over time, and yet you accept it as perfect? Even Thomas Jefferson made it perfectly clear...

"Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny."
-Thomas Jefferson

Did you read that? Read it again. I'm not going to go ask you to read 10 books and come back because you're a retard, just read that 1 quote. He said, no matter what, government is going to be corrupted. You can talk all day about restoring the constitution, but a government and a society driven by money (GOLD OR NOT!) is going to be in it for their own benefit. And for a long time, we've accepted that as the best system we could come up with... Because it WAS. If you want to start all over again, just to be corrupted in the future as Jefferson correctly hypothesized, then you are literally throwing time away. We have to change if we want to continue to become better people in this world.

Mate, I know all this. That's why I'm an anarcho-capitalist. I know governments, even ones restricted by constitutions - don't remain limited. Evil does not sleep. I want to get rid of the state. ;)

The reason I suggested those books, is because you obviously never had a good enough grounding in capitalism and free markets and what they are. Because you yourself have admitted you've been swayed. Time for re-education.


There is no dollar amount that makes you a better person. Do you think it is ethical that a person owns 10 billion dollars? Honestly, answer that. Is it ETHICAL? Do you think I'm attacking freedom when I say we could all stand to be a little more ETHICAL? Really? That is the new truth I was referring to. We have no ethics in this society, and we are always going to be plagued by it until this all falls apart. It doesn't matter if there is gold backing a dollar bill or not, unethical behavior is tearing us all down, and hiding under the flag of capitalism, just as it has always hidden under every other tyrannical flag. You seriously can't blame everyone's behavior and all the ills that the people of this nation, and the whole world face, on the fact that there is no gold standard. People who bust their asses aren't going to be any happier getting minimum wage in gold, or fiat paper.

If that person has provided an insurmountable amount of increased productivity, happiness and pleasure for other people. If they have used their subjective value and purchased his product / goods or service - and he has made money from it. WHAT is unethical about that? What is unethical about Bill Gates and the service he has provided? just as one example. :confused:

I mean really... if you obtain MONEY through voluntarism, through exchange of goods and services.. what is MORE ethical than that? You are mixing up the obtainment of money - with exploitation... which is what HAPPENS now... but this is NOT CAPITALISM. Ya digg? It can't be that hard to understand.. Non aggression + property rights is the libertarian founding blocs and foundations.

Look into it. ;) Because you seriously haven't. While there was a quasi gold standard... it was the most peaceful time in terms of wars, in modern history.

As soon as the Central Bank came into creation. The US has been at war ever since... and undeclared since 44'.


I hate communism, I hate the government, and I want nothing to do with them. The government cannot give us anything we don't already have, except understanding through error. We all need to learn to become more ethical, not "re-educated" like you think I need to be (re-educated, thats NWO speak). Ethics will be learned the hard way. All this corruption, pain, and suffering that is coming, will not leave without a new understanding of what it means to be ethical in this world.

And if you think I'm such a stupid moron for saying these things, then thats your prerogative.

Ok, good you say you hate communism and government. You just need to stop hating on capitalism. Because clinically, if you hate and denounce capitalism, you pretty much are by default a socialist. What possible system could you be advocating otherwise? No free markets? You're not advocating the "third way" are you? :rolleyes:

Socialism vs Capitalism ain't a false dichonomy. And I would LOVE for you to prove otherwise. Until then, you're in dream land without a logical thought as to WHY or what it is, but you just "FEEL" that there is another way. :o

The Ethics of Liberty by Murray Rothbard
http://mises.org/media.aspx?action=category&ID=95
http://mises.org/rothbard/ethics.pdf

Enjoy, I think this is what you've been looking for. :p

[Defining Obscene]

Well see, calling what I envision as a dreamland is no more of a dreamland than a government and economy that can never be tainted. We're already watching one dreamland go down in flames... I'm not saying I know all the answers yet, maybe when this all falls apart and people start becoming a little more ethical, the neo-patriots can put something together that actually expounds on freedom, without the limits of money and government. But if we're ethical, there won't really be a need for money or government anyway. Of COURSE it sounds crazy now, because it hasn't existed yet, its unprecedented.

And when I was saying owning 10 billion dollars as being unethical, we need to look into what the accepted ideas of business are. It is acceptable to cut down supply to drive the price up. Why are we manufacturing lack for profit? What stops people from cutting the supply of food to drain resources of those who need it most? That principal is not seen as unethical, its seen as good business. Think about those "terminator seeds", what a disgusting product. Back to the 10 billion and Bill Gates example, Bill Gates doesn't do all the work himself. He hasn't done any work in how many years? Yet he gets all the royalties of it. Sure, he has a board that gets decent pay, but what about manufacturers? What about the little guys? Why are they not even seeing .000001 of a billion per year? This is where I disagree fundamentally, and I also disagree that it is socialism. He is paying the people who are doing his work, hes not chipping into some fund for a bum to get his teeth fixed. This is why jobs get outsourced, all the exploitation, it just never ends. But if you believe in a free market, then you believe that these people can pay however much they want, even if its extremely unethical, and we are taught not to complain because its a fully-functional system. Its dysfunctional IMO, and a grotesque example of how far people can stretch "American ideals". I'm not talking about leveraging money and the Federal reserve, I'm talking about simple business principals that we've come to accept. Supply and demand, supply and demand, supply and demand. People care more about maximizing profit than providing the service, just ask anyone who has lost their job. It all comes down to ethics, and the concept of money supply.


It wasn't Zeitgeist that changed my opinion. It came the realization that 1776 was the prime of government in our nation, and that there is no way to get it back or preserve it. We are witnessing the ugliest things we could have ever imagined, all happen at once. If we don't want to face these things again, we all have to come to some sort of agreement on a system, or really, a lack of a system, and base everything on ethics, or whatever further understanding we may reach after that. It boggles me how this country wants to slip into communism, like they have forgotten about the Soviets or even the Chinese. It boggles me how people seem to conveniently forget that the Nation Socialist Workers Party IS the Nazi party. Zeitgeist was only useful in that it showed alternatives can be recognized, aside from the 3 base systems, although their proposed system was really disturbingly close to a pretty sick agenda. It opens the minds to possibilities, and nothing more. If people can't use their discretion, that is their loss, for in a free society no one can tell them what to watch or think. And the simple fact that they are railing against religious ideology is proof that they are not about freedom, they are about re-education (reprogramming), as Joseph clearly repeated over and over.


Ultimately what I'm saying is, let this play out. From the ashes something will rise that was better than the predecessor. If we still cling to our system, then they will still cling to theirs, and this will start all over again. We can't afford to do this again, and I don't mean money wise, because I think this is going to get pretty ugly soon. But I'm not worried, this has to happen.

[Conza88]

Well see, calling what I envision as a dreamland is no more of a dreamland than a government and economy that can never be tainted. We're already watching one dreamland go down in flames... I'm not saying I know all the answers yet, maybe when this all falls apart and people start becoming a little more ethical, the neo-patriots can put something together that actually expounds on freedom, without the limits of money and government. But if we're ethical, there won't really be a need for money or government anyway. Of COURSE it sounds crazy now, because it hasn't existed yet, its unprecedented.

And when I was saying owning 10 billion dollars as being unethical, we need to look into what the accepted ideas of business are. It is acceptable to cut down supply to drive the price up. Why are we manufacturing lack for profit? What stops people from cutting the supply of food to drain resources of those who need it most? That principal is not seen as unethical, its seen as good business. Think about those "terminator seeds", what a disgusting product. Back to the 10 billion and Bill Gates example, Bill Gates doesn't do all the work himself. He hasn't done any work in how many years? Yet he gets all the royalties of it. Sure, he has a board that gets decent pay, but what about manufacturers? What about the little guys? Why are they not even seeing .000001 of a billion per year? This is where I disagree fundamentally, and I also disagree that it is socialism. He is paying the people who are doing his work, hes not chipping into some fund for a bum to get his teeth fixed. This is why jobs get outsourced, all the exploitation, it just never ends. But if you believe in a free market, then you believe that these people can pay however much they want, even if its extremely unethical, and we are taught not to complain because its a fully-functional system. Its dysfunctional IMO, and a grotesque example of how far people can stretch "American ideals". I'm not talking about leveraging money and the Federal reserve, I'm talking about simple business principals that we've come to accept. Supply and demand, supply and demand, supply and demand. People care more about maximizing profit than providing the service, just ask anyone who has lost their job. It all comes down to ethics, and the concept of money supply.


It wasn't Zeitgeist that changed my opinion. It came the realization that 1776 was the prime of government in our nation, and that there is no way to get it back or preserve it. We are witnessing the ugliest things we could have ever imagined, all happen at once. If we don't want to face these things again, we all have to come to some sort of agreement on a system, or really, a lack of a system, and base everything on ethics, or whatever further understanding we may reach after that. It boggles me how this country wants to slip into communism, like they have forgotten about the Soviets or even the Chinese. It boggles me how people seem to conveniently forget that the Nation Socialist Workers Party IS the Nazi party. Zeitgeist was only useful in that it showed alternatives can be recognized, aside from the 3 base systems, although their proposed system was really disturbingly close to a pretty sick agenda. It opens the minds to possibilities, and nothing more. If people can't use their discretion, that is their loss, for in a free society no one can tell them what to watch or think. And the simple fact that they are railing against religious ideology is proof that they are not about freedom, they are about re-education (reprogramming), as Joseph clearly repeated over and over.


Ultimately what I'm saying is, let this play out. From the ashes something will rise that was better than the predecessor. If we still cling to our system, then they will still cling to theirs, and this will start all over again. We can't afford to do this again, and I don't mean money wise, because I think this is going to get pretty ugly soon. But I'm not worried, this has to happen.

For a New Liberty - Murray Rothbard (http://mises.org/media.aspx?action=category&ID=87)

And the PDF. (http://mises.org/rothbard/foranewlb.pdf)

:D