Personality Cafe banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
891 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
i was talking to my entj friend about the zeitgeist movie and she said although it seemed like a nice idea that there were a few holes she could poke in it. it annoyed me at first but then i thought hang on this is a good thing, the more problems that are thought of in advance the better since they can more easily be avoided.

so my question to you is what holes did you find in the whole idea of everyone sharing the world and have it operate with maximum efficiency?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,135 Posts
zeitgeist claims that anglo-dutch bankers rule the world in the name of queen elizabeth II

they're wackos
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
891 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
zeitgeist claims that anglo-dutch bankers rule the world in the name of queen elizabeth II

they're wackos
i didn't hear that mentioned once in the movie.

the people with money rule the world. that should be obvious to anybody. the problem is that we can't regulate wether or not those who have all the money also have morals.

do you have a better plan than the one the zeitgeist proposed? because i'm getting a little sick of living in a world where it is ok to make people work ridiculously long hours for bits of paper. i'm getting a bit sick of hearing about children in china working in sweatshops so that we can have too many pairs of nike.

i don't care who comes up with the plan i want to see some changes cos this situation is an embarrassment to all of mankind. surely we aren't that dumb as a species. surely we can come up with something a bit better than the status quo.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
891 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
I hate that movie!
Hate!

I seldom use exclamation points in my posts.
Look what it's done to me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

why do you hate it so much?

i'm really curious as to why an idea to make the world a better place to live in for EVERYONE would bring out so much hatred in anyone.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
891 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
zeitgeist claims that anglo-dutch bankers rule the world in the name of queen elizabeth II

they're wackos
i was just reading your tagline. here's a little tidbit you may or may not be aware of.

have you heard the term "daylight robbery" it came from a tax the british imposed on irish tenants. they boarded up their windows and the irish farmers had to pay a tax to have the boards removed. that is why traditional irish cottages have such small windows. the bigger the window the more tax you would have to pay.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
891 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·

·
Registered
Joined
·
648 Posts
why do you hate it so much?

i'm really curious as to why an idea to make the world a better place to live in for EVERYONE would bring out so much hatred in anyone.
I will definitely give a better description as to why when I have time, Id honestly take an hour or so going over it but for now Ill just be general:

The movie basically is targeted at a select audience.
It's not pointed towards getting a conservative audience and changing their views, which seems like it would be more important to the creators of the film.
The whole thing is pointed towards a demographic of people of a certain age and of a certain political view.
If I see movie that is trying to convince or trying to sway anyone, it should be targeted to people of the opposing view point, rather than trying to appeal to people who are ALREADY drawn to that type of thing to begin with.
Its also very "conspiracy theory"-esque, in which I automatically am skeptical.

I will write more on it later this evening, but good thread.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
891 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
I will definitely give a better description as to why when I have time, Id honestly take an hour or so going over it but for now Ill just be general:

The movie basically is targeted at a select audience.
It's not pointed towards getting a conservative audience and changing their views, which seems like it would be more important to the creators of the film.
The whole thing is pointed towards a demographic of people of a certain age and of a certain political view.
If I see movie that is trying to convince or trying to sway anyone, it should be targeted to people of the opposing view point, rather than trying to appeal to people who are ALREADY drawn to that type of thing to begin with.
Its also very "conspiracy theory"-esque, in which I automatically am skeptical.

I will write more on it later this evening, but good thread.
you know i agree. no point in converting the converted. do you have any suggestions as to how a documentary could change a conservative persons view. from my knowledge of these types you have to show them that a plan is more or less 100% guaranteed to work in order for them to go along with it.

i'm not sure that the makers of this film are trying to appeal to a certain demographic though. the way i see it is that they are giving people the truth as they see it and expect people will recognise it as such. that was what i thought when i first watched it but then again i am stuck in my enfp head looking out at the world through the lens of an enfp. at least i recognise that fact and can make allowances for it. a conservative person probably can't see that.

i don't think it is conspiracy theory nonsense and my reason for that is because of how things went down in the past. why would it be any different now? people in power have evolved along with everything else and so have become alot more sneaky in their plots to hold onto that power. take a look at the work of freuds nephew Edward Bernays. it was a real eye opener for me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RhoAlphaNuAlpha

·
Banned
Joined
·
891 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·

·
Registered
Joined
·
648 Posts
you know i agree. no point in converting the converted. do you have any suggestions as to how a documentary could change a conservative persons view. from my knowledge of these types you have to show them that a plan is more or less 100% guaranteed to work in order for them to go along with it.

i'm not sure that the makers of this film are trying to appeal to a certain demographic though. the way i see it is that they are giving people the truth as they see it and expect people will recognise it as such. that was what i thought when i first watched it but then again i am stuck in my enfp head looking out at the world through the lens of an enfp. at least i recognise that fact and can make allowances for it. a conservative person probably can't see that.

i don't think it is conspiracy theory nonsense and my reason for that is because of how things went down in the past. why would it be any different now? people in power have evolved along with everything else and so have become alot more sneaky in their plots to hold onto that power. take a look at the work of freuds nephew Edward Bernays. it was a real eye opener for me.
Good response with some good questions.
I will get back to this.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
891 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·

·
Registered
Joined
·
198 Posts
The film was broken in to three parts IIRC. Part one was about religion and the fact that it's all bullshit to control the masses. Being an atheist I agree 100%. Part two was about the golden rule (whoever has the gold makes the rules) and those thieving cocksuckers the federal reserve and other "world" banks. Capitalism and Communism are both good ideas on paper but in reality they both suck, a balanced system that makes sure no one is insanely rich and powerful and no one starves would be ideal. Part three dealt with 9/11. This is where stuff starts to get weird. There are simply too many holes in the 9/11 story to make it the way the media and the government says it is, but it's hard to believe the total cover up/government did it all theory. I've read some Noam Chomsky and he paints a good basis for the whole US government web of lies and deceit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
859 Posts
I believe there is confusion here.

The original zeitgeist is about 9/11 and microchipping and stuff like that. Zeitgeist addendum is about the abolishment of state, currency, law and government, by the means of technocratic anarchism.

I don't see the point of the first one. Addendum, on the other hand, sets a great goal - but in practice, simply describing a beautiful, fair ideal does not constitute a solution to the many problems of this world. One also has to have a realistic plan of action - and so far, Zeitgeist has not provided this.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
198 Posts
Maybe I have a little of "Freedom to Fascism" mixed in, that had stuff about microchipping in it.
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top