you make me sick,zeitgiest 2 disinfo

I wish more people would talk about the shift in consciousness that is needed for us to even have a reasonable debate about what we need as humans. If we look at our society as moving toward an ideal, then we miss the whole point of thinking. Most folks I know are scared of having money enough to retire in a few years. Perhaps the point of the movie was not to point fingers at those who control everything moneybased, but to give us the permission to understand that we are still in control of our minds. I know we can expand our abilities to perceive a reality where we are in control of where the money we spend goes. The less thoughtful we are in our choices, the less thoughtful the receiver. Please lets take the lesson on consciousness seriously.

First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently. opposed. Third, it is. accepted as self-. evident. — Schopenhauer.

Z

reply to post by greenjuice


I full well understand your reaction to the Zeitgeist Documentaries 1)video.google.com... and 2) video.google.com... but you really should not get too too upset because you and all those living today, with the except of a small percentage of mankind will all be dead and long gone before a generation that could live as the Venus Project discusses could happen. With a few exceptions, everything discussed and put forth in the video is absolutely true but let's face it, the truth has little to do with much where human being are concerned; lies, hypocrisy, pompous bigotry and self serving deceptions are all very much a way of life for most human beings. Come on, let's face it what creature would have the audacity to think they know who the Creator behind all that exists, let alone create God in their own imagine.

However, there is Justice and Karma, that is why everyone inevitably dies or are killed and from all I can see, there is a great deal of that in store for everyone and what generation could be more deserving or not missed.

So relax, believe what serves you; you couldn't do much about much anyway.

reply to post by badmedia


Except we have technology that if developed freely would help us go farther and help us do anything better than we can do now.

Also our whole economy is based on scarcity, not abundance, if everyone in the world had enough food for themselves plus some the prices of foods would go way way down, so the only logical way to have power in this system is to deny foods for many so prices go up and you make a profit.

Scarcity limits society, abundance grows societies.

Originally posted by caballero
reply to post by badmedia

 

Except we have technology that if developed freely would help us go farther and help us do anything better than we can do now.

Also our whole economy is based on scarcity, not abundance, if everyone in the world had enough food for themselves plus some the prices of foods would go way way down, so the only logical way to have power in this system is to deny foods for many so prices go up and you make a profit.

Scarcity limits society, abundance grows societies.

We have scarcity today because the money is all debt. The interest money is never created and it by default creates the scarcity.

Removing that element in itself will remove scarcity. To where we then live under a system that is built on wealth/value(abundance), rather than debt@interest(scarcity). It's a completely different ballgame when you remove the element that is stealing vast amounts of resources from the people. Which will only come by exposing them to the people, so they can see for themselves(movie is good on that part).

The only thing you are talking about is technological advancements, and the benefits of it. No argument there. It's the system of communism that is constantly passed around that is the problem.

It's the same system I've heard about in the alien forums, only the aliens are supposed to be giving us the technology. I've heard this same plan in many different ways. It's all communism.

Again, I'll ask the same basic questions people REFUSE to answer who support this.

Who decides how much resources each person gets? Who decides how the resources are being managed properly? What will be done to people who do not go along with the system.

The only way such could possibly work is if we had unlimited resources. In which case, there would not need to be any system to "manage" the resources.

[edit on 8-10-2008 by badmedia]

reply to post by badmedia


So we should leave the decision of who gets what to people who want it all?

What seems right about that?

Originally posted by caballero
reply to post by badmedia

 

So we should leave the decision of who gets what to people who want it all?

What seems right about that?

Failed to answer them questions again huh?

Where did I ever suggest what you've said? We need an honest system of capitalism and free markets. Not the corporatism we have today. What we have today is called free markets, but it is anything but.

The 1st order of business should be to get rid of the fed and it's economic slavery. At that point, you stop the transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich with inflation.

The 2nd order of business is to stop the corporatism. Where corporations through lobbyists keep passing laws that benefit them, but get rid of competition.

The 3rd order of business should be to fix patent laws. Where corporations are able to buy patents and keep them on hold as a way of keeping competition away. If you have a patent that you don't use and put to work, you lose it. That simple.

The 4th order of business is to get rid of social crimes where there is no victim. Where as a society we respect peoples free will.

If you want to live under a system like above, that is fine with me. It's the fact that you need to force everyone else to live under it that I have a problem with. There should be nothing to stop you from forming organizations and communities like this. That is your free will. It's not until you step on my free will that we have a problem.

alex jones rips zeitgeist apart
au.youtube.com...

reply to post by badmedia


I think that they are trying to present ideas towards a better future for everyone. Perhaps they are a little overbearingly pushing the venus project, but i think that is to show directions we could go as a society.

Free energy, it is there. The discovery channel, a mass media outlet, has even said that a 100 sq mile photovoltaic solar array at its current technology could power the entire U.S. for several years. On this basis alone we need to at least try to fill the emerging energy needs the best we can by educating people to power their own households and attempting to harness it on a large scale, which no one is doing.

Regarding hiding resources for profit;

First, fossils fuels are made to appear more scarce than they truly are to encourage profit. So the laws of supply and demand are a clear example of hiding available energy when it is extremely harmful to people simply for profit.

Second, if you had the monopoly on something that everyone thought they needed would you really be the one to tell them that it is not as necessary as they thought? I am sure you are a good person, as we all are, but money corrupts very quickly.

Third, would people who are very willing to go to war over profits, be concerned with what is going to make a great society? (you can find many historical examples if you do the research)

As for Ron Paul, they were not mocking him. They were using him to make the point that we may be beyond voting in a candidate that can make any sort of lasting impact. If you ask me they were complimenting him, using him as the example of a strong well rounded politician, but making the point he will not be able to make the lasting impact necessary to change anything. Not anything against him, but that no-one can make the lasting changes to fix this and prevent it from happening again.

I think the whole point of that section was "the people" coming together as a species for societal change, rather than "the people" being forced together under a one world government lead by corrupt profit hungry individuals.

reply to post by badmedia


I think its safe to say that we can agree to disagree on our examples of a
utopia.

We can also agree that we need major change in this dystopia we live in today.

I can see where Capitalism and free markets that are both uncorrupted by greedy elites can help a lot of people, but the monetary system is what holds us back.

It will always seperate us into classes from richest to poorest, it will always make certain things in life unattainable. Almost certainly it will end up corrupted and exploited as it is today so what is the point in trying to fix a system that is bound to be corrupted later on?

Originally posted by caballero
reply to post by badmedia

 

I think its safe to say that we can agree to disagree on our examples of a
utopia.

We can also agree that we need major change in this dystopia we live in today.

I can see where Capitalism and free markets that are both uncorrupted by greedy elites can help a lot of people, but the monetary system is what holds us back.

It will always seperate us into classes from richest to poorest, it will always make certain things in life unattainable. Almost certainly it will end up corrupted and exploited as it is today so what is the point in trying to fix a system that is bound to be corrupted later on?

I think it's safe to say nobody who supports the venus project is going to answer those basic questions I asked above.

What makes you think any other system is immune from greed? That's the thing, people pretend greed is just going to go away. The more power you consolidate, the more tempting and damaging that corruption is going to be. Thus, the only way to ensure the corruption doesn't get out of control and in charge is to limit and spread out the power. Decentralization rather than the centralization we are moving to today. If things are decentralized, then the greed and corruption can't take over everything easily. Centralize everything, and very few people can corrupt the entire system.

You can't get rid of the rich and the poor. You can stop the rich from stealing the wealth of the poor. I'm all for that. Forcing people to be equal is to steal from 1 and give it to another. We can't just pretend some people aren't smarter or better workers/inventors etc than others. The only thing you can do is treat people equally, and have the same opportunities as others.

Treating people equally means respecting others, and allowing them to live as they see fit among other things. Socialism and "for the community" doesn't do that at all. It centralizes everything and anyone who doesn't go along is "dealt" with.

reply to post by greenjuice
I hate to say this about Alex Jones I agree with him on alot of things but,it seems whenever a film comes out that offers a solution to our current problems he goes against it,let's face it he's got just as big an interest in keeping maintaing the satus qoue as TPTB he fights against.I

reply to post by mike dangerously


Except that the movie blatantly calls for global socialism which is exactly the NWO model. I don't listen to him, I don't need the anger, but if he went along with the video's solution, then I'd be saying exactly what you are - that he wants to continue the status quo.

Who decides how much resources each person gets?
- Nobody. If you have the necessities of life covered you're golden. Any more and you're just greedy. This is the problem. A utopian society is defect free. We'll never achieve that with instilled human behaviours that hold everyone back.

Who decides how the resources are being managed properly?
- Nobody and everybody. Those with a love for managing resources will do it and teach those with a growing interest in it - and this will trickle down to every household.

What will be done to people who do not go along with the system?
- With the instilled human behaviours instilled over how many centuries in the monetary based system, this will be a major problem. I think there will always be greedy people, even when all necessities of life are accounted for. But like Fresco said, we will never achieve perfection.

The only way such could possibly work is if we had unlimited resources. In which case, there would not need to be any system to "manage" the resources.
- The whole point Fresco made was that technology is being held back, which can create or help create and maintain, and therefore properly manage unlimited resources. This will not be seen in a monetary based system. Everyone would still have to manage resources however.

It's hard to describe utopia in a dystopian society.

www.utopianstates.com...

reply to post by badmedia
Jones,has been known to try and debunk competeing conspiracy docs,of course he wolud he does not really want any real alternative ideas crowding out his and the patriot movment's ideas,unhappy people make great costumers for his vids and others,that's why he really never offers any real soultions.As for the Venus Project I don't see how the very idea of a open resource system can be so threating it's not like it will ever happen with the world in it's current sate and Humanity being a total slave to the current system.

reply to post by mike dangerously


I don't listen to him, so I'm not defending him. But if he is pointing out the bogus part of the project Venus part, then he is exactly right. And that fact doesn't change no matter who says it, other than they are right about it.

And there are always bogus conspiracy movies going around. It's part of it. No matter if it's intentional disinfo, or just someone mistaken.

So because someone debunks some, they are suddenly wrong about everything? What kind of level of thinking is this? I again have no idea what he's debunked or what, but that basis alone is not even close to being an intelligent way of deciding fact or fiction. Character assassination is all that is, and that only works on sheeple.

Originally posted by badmedia
reply to post by mike dangerously

 

I don't listen to him, so I'm not defending him. But if he is pointing out the bogus part of the project Venus part, then he is exactly right. And that fact doesn't change no matter who says it, other than they are right about it.

And there are always bogus conspiracy movies going around. It's part of it. No matter if it's intentional disinfo, or just someone mistaken.

So because someone debunks some, they are suddenly wrong about everything? What kind of level of thinking is this? I again have no idea what he's debunked or what, but that basis alone is not even close to being an intelligent way of deciding fact or fiction. Character assassination is all that is, and that only works on sheeple.

I don't mind debunkers I just question those who's motive seems to be deeply contected to their business.Anyway's badmeida hope we continue this disscussion it's been a good one.

reply to post by badmedia


why are you so upset by the thought of change?

Why cant you just accept that we disagree so we can stop arguing about who is right and start discussing what could be the next step, our version of whats best not the venus projects.

reply to post by caballero


What makes you think I'm upset about change? It's the direction of change that matters. I want to get rid of all the corruption, not go to a system that rewards the corruption and gives them more power than before.

I'm all about small government, not big government. I don't want or need government to manage my life, I want and need a government that prevents people from trying to manage my life.

I don't need or want a government that manages the resources, I need and want a government that makes sure someone isn't stealing them.

I don't need or want a government that gives control of the money supply over to corrupt bankers, along with fractional banking, I need and want a government that stops it.