It's Official: Zeitgeist, Peter Joeseph, is out in left field.....

Originally posted by winterass
The only thing i have to say is the hypocrisy around Zeitgeist

You can say jesus never existed and everything is alright, but if you say mohammed never existed you are suddenly evil.

Hypocrisy around Zeitgeist?

When did they say...

but if you say mohammed never existed you are suddenly evil.

Originally posted by TruthTellist
-no matter what the question, the answer is always the same. A nonanswer.

When you take money out of the equation you still have "stuff". That's the answer. But I will expand on it...

The worker labors to produce things. We sell those things for money. We then use that money to buy things.

Take away the money and we still have the things.

Ultimately we are not working for money; the incentive is not money. Ultimately we are working to build new things. We work also so we can attain new things.

Taking money out of the equation doesn't change our drive to produce things and our incentive to get new things.

Money just represents this process. Money has no inherent value. For instance, would you labor for money and then never spend it??

What is being suggested is that we use a currency that has inherent value. I.E the things themselves. It's really just taking a layer out of the pie. Severing the disconnect that exists today with the working force and its production.

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy



What do you intend you use for commerce?

Credits?

None of the ZeitGeist followers have been able to explain how their Fantasyland system will manage to function.

*They just say "You don't get it, everything will free. You've been conditioned to think you need money"

Of course, they don't offer a replacement for commerce, they just repeat
"You don't get it... Everything will be free. You have been conditioned..."
It is sad to see such effective, REAL conditioning right here on ATS.

Something you should know by now;

Money has 3 main uses. First and most important it is a medium of exchange. Second it serves as a unit of account. Third use of money is as a store of wealth.

When it is printed illegally by an Unconstitutional system, money becomes fiat currency.

Fiat currency (not money) can be manipulated to the advantage of those who spend it first after it is printed.

Communism, Socialism has all been tried before. even they had to resort to a common currency in order to maintain commerce and allow their people to survive - even though shelter and food were free; the shelter was overcrowded and the food was not ever enough.

There was an old saying from the Soviet Union: "We pretend to work, they pretend to pay us"

It has been tried before. It never Works.

*Have you read the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights?

*Have you read the American Declaration of Independence?


[edit on 23-10-2008 by TruthTellist]

Since you edited yours


I edited mine

[edit on 23-10-2008 by Lucid Lunacy]

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy

I have had you on ignore for several weeks, but took you off the list tonight, only to discover you were still replying to my posts. I sent you notice, twice.

Targetting members who cannot post rebuttals because they cannot see your posts is effective strategy, but it is dishonourable...

*don't reply to this.

[edit on 23-10-2008 by TruthTellist]

I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

Originally posted by TruthTellist
*Have you read the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights?

*Have you read the American Declaration of Independence?

Are you assuming I have not, or were you asking for another reason? I have read them both. Read and tested in school. Since then it's bits and pieces here and there. Pretty normal I imagine.

Originally posted by TruthTellist

What do you intend you use for commerce?

Credits?

Currency?

Thought I was clear with my earlier answer?

The things we build and the things we trade for. That's the currency. The items themselves. Think of it as a barter system if you will, although I don't think that's a fair assessment.

Look before I spend more time with answers, and I am more then willing to do so, I am wondering if you are interested to begin with?

I am open and willing to entertain all the political philosophies in pursuit of a better societal structure, but you have made it pretty clear in this thread and in others that you feel anything resembling socialism, and communism, etc, is a waste of time to even ponder. You talk like they are the devil. Some of these principles are in fact socialistic, not all, but many. So am I just walking into a discussion where you scoff?

Also, I am not a follower.

[edit on 23-10-2008 by Lucid Lunacy]

I dont know if anybody is still reading and replying to this post but I figure this would be the best place to ask some of my own questions to see what everyones response would be.
Crime as said in ZA is motivated bu money, you get rid of money you get rid of crime and there is no need for prisons. But what about Serial Killers, Rapists ...Re educate. What if they wont take to the re education?

What off those who do smoke and choose to smoke even with the health hazards associated with this vice? When you drink you ruin your liver and the motor, coordination (DT's) within your brain. I mean all in all what about vices?
As for those who join the Venus Project and do go through re-education, will that mean the drive to have Iphones, PS3's and the latest Laptop will be trained away? What would that entail as well to be re educated? Schooling? brainwashing?
I really am interested in this Idea I would love an ideal world that meant no currency, that meant no evil, that is aimed towards progress. But at what cost exactly?

reply to post by TruthTellist


TruthTellist

Comparing a social revolution to communism that was doomed to fail right from the start, is why I see you disagreeing.

The system Peter proposes is not an updated copy of sharing wealth. The system he proposes is that we rid ourselves of the enslaving thoughts that is ownership. And when we do that, we'd lose the need for currency. There would be no need for commercial exchange. There is only giving and recieving.

It's extremely hard to comprehend the simplicity of it. But we have been conditioned to believe that a lot of social guide lines we resort to at the moment are crucial to our lives. This is a fallace, what is in fact true is that we can survive without an enormous amount of the implantations we have in society today.

His general thought is that humans are ready to evolve and go to the next level, where we start working together instead of working to create distance, which is what we are doing currently.
This thought is similar to those of Karl Marx and Lenin, and I presume that is the reason people are likely to just brand him a modern communist. The reason why Peter isn't a communist is that his ideas are so far away from what we have defined so far. And because there is no definition of a system where everyone can be happy, we just smack the definition we know on it - Utopia. It cannot happen. It cannot happen while Wall Street and the corporate greed controls the world, no. But it can happen.

We can at least strive towards it. Instead of furthering the distance between rich and poor. If you're religious - practise giving, not as a means to the end that is getting into heaven, but as a means to improve your environment and the people in it. If you're politically strong, prioritise bringing poverty to it's knees. If you're commercially strong, refuse to deal with abusive methods to earn your dime. If you're just an average Joe, do your research and make sure you become a person expressing thinking, instead of a mindless consumer zombie that still buys Addidas, Nike, Coca Cola and McDonalds.
If people rose to the job, instead of making excuses like "this is impossible to achieve", then we could do it.

In fact - We can do anything.

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy

Originally posted by TruthTellist

What do you intend you use for commerce?

Credits?

Currency?

Thought I was clear with my earlier answer?

The things we build and the things we trade for. That's the currency. The items themselves. Think of it as a barter system if you will, although I don't think that's a fair assessment.

Look before I spend more time with answers, and I am more then willing to do so, I am wondering if you are interested to begin with?

I am open and willing to entertain all the political philosophies in pursuit of a better societal structure, but you have made it pretty clear in this thread and in others that you feel anything resembling socialism, and communism, etc, is a waste of time to even ponder. You talk like they are the devil. Some of these principles are in fact socialistic, not all, but many. So am I just walking into a discussion where you scoff?

Also, I am not a follower.

[edit on 23-10-2008 by Lucid Lunacy]

There's no getting through to some 'amercuns' Every system devised as governance
on earth is open to abuse and tyrrany. The USA is no different. Nazism, Pol Pot, Josef Stalin... these are but the shock and awe examples of 'failure' But I'm sure if you notch up the US bodycount since 45 in CIA led coups and porxy wars, assassinations etc
(not counting tghe firebombing of Dresden and Nuking 100K Japanese civilians) you'll see that the US has killed more people than the Cambodians have managed themselves.

Don't be fooled by the pace of subversion, slaughter and oppression.... just because the US as a political system moves slower than your historical 'holocausts' the revisionists feed to us in the indocrination camps called shools and universities doesn't mean it's any less malevolent than the star spangled blinded would have you believe.

George Orwell (an adrent socialist/communist) wrote a book called Animal Farm and I suggest you read it. Peter Jacksons suggestions sound good on paper but who'll gets the casting votes ? Will the breadmakers have the same say as the MAGLEV scientists and the Fusion inventors within. Of course they're not. It's more of the same elite...scientists wanting to take the place of the bankers and money men as despots

People are and will be inherently greedy / lazy even within the Zeitgeist.

Utopia, it's but a pipedream.... we'll always be living within a world of skullduggery to certain degrees and those degrees have no moral high ground however hard Americans scream and kick about it.

Yep, Communism was flawed but so is a system where you are sold a dream that hard work and belief in freedom means 300 million people can no longer work, live in 10 million dollar homes and drive Lambourghinis...... sounds worse than the craziest religion or pyramid scheme I've heard of but there's a nation of rabid bigots that believe it and are willing to die for it. (quick question.... who's going to clean these 300 million plus swimming pools behind the american dream??? The Chinese ??)

May of the examples of failure that US citizens hold up as proof their 'system' is better
than what's went before has actually been destroyed through economic and subversive
actions by their government and shadow factions so who the hell really knows what works on a level playing field ??

I just sit back and watch those trying to play/change/buck the system behind the smoke and mirrors. Like maggots crawling over each other to get to a rotten carcass.

reply to post by The_Brave


I understand this is an old thread... and this has probably been brought up before.... but there is no such thing as good and evil.... certainly there are those scumbags who kill kids... and light their hair on fire... and its not outside of any sort of symantic gymnastics to not declare somebody 'evil'... Its an easy word... an easy term.... almost like calling somebody crazy... its dismissive... it disregards a sense of reason, and a sense of the reason why something which people call 'evil' even happens....

Molesting a child for example... or hell lets get extreme 10 kids... there is a reason why it happens... and there is some reason why it happens over and over and over again....

To me modern psychology is primitive...but do you really think that if Hitler won the war in WWII that the genocide of a few million jews, gypsies and other would have been considered 'evil?' absolutely not... it would have been considered necessary... sort of how torture, lack of due process, having sex with children in front of their parents.... you know... the stuff we as Americans do... and wether or not you condone it or not you allow it to happen.... you are not doing anything to stop it... so are you evil? because you let it happen and passively accept it?

In philsophy you have Utilitarianism vs Deontology.... its old school... you have Utilitiarianism (greatest good for the greatest number) and its opposite 'Deontology' (which says if a nazi officer comes to your house harboring jews... and lying is bad so you rat them out... because lying is bad... aka moral absolutism....) Utilitarianism is supposedly 'democratic'... however its not... Thomas Jefferson knew this which is why he said 'Democracy is 2 wolves and a sheep voting on what they want to eat for dinner". Its abut a republic... respect for the rule of law... it isnt we kill 1 person to save 99... the 99 rally around the 1 and it becomes a society about whats right... and not about sacrificing 1 person to save 99 other people....

Hello,
First, my english is not the best.
I'm 23 and I'm from Germany. I did not know where I should ask my question here, so I post it here.
We're talking a lot about the NWO here in germany.
But slowly, our press is censoring too much infos about political things.
Does anyone here speak German?Have a lot of questions for you,but my English is really miserable ^^Have a little compassion with me.It is my first entry in such a forum.

nice greeting

David