Zeitgeist, just an interesting movie, fun for the whole family!

The "movie" is communist propaganda mixed in with truth to make it seem easier to "believe". Use your heads people, some of you are falling in hook line and sinker.

Can also go here: http://forums.libertylove...

Looks like no progress can be had on this forum because a bunch of fanatical fascists don't have a clue about freedom. I'm sure they'll spread their hate all over the internet. Maybe then they'll be discredited for the slackjawed hackers of freedom they are.

Also, because I noticed the contact option from people is gone anyone who wants to talk about solutions presented in the movie can reach me at runforron@gmail.com

http://killfiat.blogspot....

Bump to promote ideas. Anyone who calls for banning individuals on this forum for using their first amendment to promote ideas is a fascist.

http://killfiat.blogspot....

Any comments?
http://www.dailypaul.com/...

Since you decided to re-post think4yourself's post, I realized you'd like a re-post of my response to it as well, just in case you missed it the first time. I have no doubt you'll read it in the interests of fairness, which I'm sure you are:

Here's a point by point refutation of yet another misguided Addendum zealot.

"Despite my support for free-markets, I think we need to admit the fact that "pure free-market capitalism" has never actually existed and is just as idealistic as any of the other hypothetical systems. Yet you defend it religiously."

So because pure free-market capitalism has never exited is reason not to defend it? So back in the days when chattel slavery was legal you would no doubt object to abolitionist's idealism because "we've never had a society without slavery".

"You've got to wake up to the fact that even though free-market capitalism is better than what we have now, and is probably the best possible monetary-based economic system, that doesn't make it perfect. It still bears the same essential flaws that have got us into the mess we're in today."

After just saying free-market capitalism has never existed,now the author claims it "bears the same essential flaws that have got us into the mess we're in today", and goes on to say, "Capitalism is not devoid of problems; it is not the final solution."

Its a good idea to explain what we're talking about. Free-market capitalism is simply liberty with respect to people's economic activities. Any economic system other than free-market capitalism is an economic system infected with varying degrees of coercion - an economic system where some people force others to act against their own best judgment under threat of violence. It also turns out that not only is it the only economic system fully consistent with liberty it is also far and away the most efficient system for satisfyng people's wants. Yet the author focuses on it not being "devoid of problems". There are "problems" in all systems in that perfect knowledge is denied humanity and without such perfection problems will emerge. Fortunately we have the ability to reason by which we hopefully can overcome problems. The Addendum visionairies will be immersed in even worse problems should they ever try to rid the world of a price system - a point the Addendum supporters consistently refuse to address.

In a free-market environment you are, of course, free to enter any other voluntarily entered arrangements such as an Addendum style commune. All the free market economists teach with respect to such choices is that they are doomed to inefficiency if they seek to enjoy the benefits of a modern industrial society in the absence of a price system to rationally coordinate the billions of economic arrangements necessary to create and maintain such a society.

Nevertheless, the author asserts, "The point being made in Zeitgeist about the monetary-system is simple: a competition-based system for profit by differential advantage is destined to produce the problems we face today: corruption, elitism, poverty, crime, war, etc. Unfortunately, even a purely free market economy is no exception."

Curious that your author sees the result of a huge network of voluntary exchanges - which is what the free-market is - causing "corruption, elitism, poverty, crime, war".

"Corruption" implies dishonesty. Free exchange implies parties exchanging based upon differing values regarding the items exchanged. Dishonesty in such an environment is the exception. Dishonesty rising to fraud can occur in a free market and legal principles would provide remedies against such behavior, not to mention that a business that gets a reputation for dishonesty loses business rapidly thus has an incentive for fair dealing - an incentive that would not exist in your moneyless ideal world.

As to "elitism" - I suppose you mean some people simply thinking they are better in some respect than others. While a silly attitude, as long as no coercion is involved to force the "non-elite" into subservience, no big deal.

Your author alleges "Poverty" as an outcome of free markets, revealing your author fails to understand that the competitive aspect of free markets serves to reduce prices and improve quality for the masses. It is the market that has raised the standard of living for hundreds of millions of people beyond that which was enjoyed by kings of old - better medicine, better food and hygiene, better housing and clothes. Free markets are clearly the cure for poverty.

"Crime" - all crimes by definition consist of the intent to cause harm to the person or property of another. Hence it is activity whereby there is no mutual consent/volunteerism. As free-market activity is exclusively one of consent/volunteerism, crime is not cause by free trade.

Finally, "War" - the same argument applies here. War is extreme coercion. Free markets are extreme volunteerism. In a world of free trade and property rights war would not exist.

Then we come to perhaps the most erroneous statement the author makes: "Even if we could establish this supposedly perfect system, how long do you think it would it last? With time (decades or centuries), a few 'best players' in the game will inevitably gain massive wealth and power, which they are destined to use against others in order to secure their power forever. Sound familiar? That's why some people believe that evil is in our nature. If we promote the conditions that cause it, yes it is. Power corrupts."

This is just another varient of the oft-exploded "free-markets lead to destructive monopoly" myth. Economic theory tells us it is precisely the competition of the free market that prevents monopolists cornering the market, driving out competition and jacking up prices enormously and continuously. Historical analysis confirms the theory. Gabrial Kolko, historian at Toronto University, and himself a socialist, studied all the major industries of the Progressive Era and in his book, 'The Triumph of Conservatism', found all the dominant firms in these various industries petitioned the government for regulation because they were losing more market share to newcomers every year. And, since they were the "experienced" players in these fields the new government created regulators took action to stifle competition and ensure profits for their buddies in the established firms. They effectively cartelized these industries in the name of protecting the public. Thus, if government didn't have the power to regulate, as free market economists recommend, consumers would be much better served by free-markets and no coercive monopolies would occur.

Finally, your author improperly cites Lord Acton's dictum, "Power corrupts" in condemning free markets, oblivious to the fact Lord Acton was referring to "political" power - which has no place in free markets. The only power businesses in free markets have is to try and serve their customers better than their competitors - which can only be to the public's benefit.

Your author finishes by explaining Zeitguist's message as, "The theory is that if we stopped perpetuating this system of competition over scarce, poorly-managed resources, people would naturally reorganize at a grassroots level to work for a common goal without needing to compete amongst each other, and could do so without the need for central authority."

This is rife with error. First, if it is a free market the resources are being not only well managed but there is no other method that can manage them as well - since, as so many of we critics of Addendum have pointed out - only a free price system is able to coordinate resources to their most valued use. Further, rather than being detrimental, competition serves to make ever better and ever less expensive products. Competition encourages effficiency for the public welfare. Have you ever seen the dour, surly faces of counter clerks in the formerly Communist countries of Eastern Europe? As they got paid regardless of their service they had no incentive to serve well. The competitive process encourages an attitude of friendly service. Competition promotes congeniality between seller and buyer.

I, of course, don't expect any Addendum zealots to read, much less respond in a similar point by point manner to this post but I will know you failed to defend your position yet again.

marlow

http://www.opednews.com/a...

Zeitgeist II film (and website) is dark, foreboding, and dire. Its appeal will be most effective with the disaffected who recognize the problems and yearn for positive direction. I loved it; the film resolved my ambivalence over boycotting the vote. Zeitgeist II spends the first half of the film explaining the monetary system. That's a good thing; most of us have no clue how money really works. My three college econ courses never explained the creation of money through debt. Nor did they warn of the ramifications of this century-old pyramid scheme that is today collapsing before us. Dennis Kucinich recently recommended Paul Grignon's 47-minute animated documentary, Money as Debt, for an introduction to our monetary system. So do I. Zeitgeist II takes the instruction further, and then moves into an interconnected exposé of corporations and capitalism.

http://killfiat.blogspot....

http://2012.tribe.net/thr...

Zeitgeist - Addendum" [ Zeitgeist II

Zeitgeist, The Movie' and 'Zeitgeist: Addendum' were created as Not-for-Profit expressions
to communicate what the author felt were highly important social understandings which
most humans are generally not aware of.
The first film focuses on suppressed
historical & modern information about currently dominant social institutions, while
also exploring what could be in store for humanity if the power structures at large continue
their patterns of self-interest, corruption, and power consolidation.

The second film, Zeitgeist: Addendum, attempts to locate the root causes
of this pervasive social corruption, while offering a solution.
This solution is not
based not on politics, morality, laws, or any other "establishment" notions of human affairs,
but rather on a modern, non-superstitious based understanding of what we are
and how we align with nature, to which we are a part.
The work advocates
a new social system which is updated to present day knowledge, highly influenced
by the life long work of Jacque Fresco and The Venus Project.

Watch Video for Free:

video.google.com/videoplay

http://killfiat.blogspot....

From the UK Liberatarian Blog. Very revealing comments across the pond: http://lpuk.blogspot.com/...
Zeitgeist: Addendum

A confession: despite being one of the most popular internet movies of all time, I've never watched Zeitgeist. I've tried on a few occasions, and always been turned off -- and physically turned off -- within a few minutes by the apparently portentous and pretentious nature of the film. Maybe it gets better? Who knows.

It was therefore with some trepidation that I approached Zeitgeist: Addendum, which was released yesterday. Thankfully, the arty guff that I found so off-putting in the first film only lasted 3 or 4 minutes, before the movie proper started.

Addendum kicks off into one of the best short descriptions of how the monetary supply and FRB works that I've seen for a while. Having illustrated the stupidity of this system, the film moves on to look at the activities of 'economic hit-men', and how the CIA and the ruling political/corporate elites have worked to undermine legitimate foreign regimes who have had the temerity to put the interests of their populations before those of transnational corporations. The entirely accurate view painted of how institutions like the World Bank, WTO and IMF have conspired to screw over developing nations for corporate benefit will, I'm sure, raise the hackles of neoliberal shills everywhere.

The film then takes a somewhat major swerve into the left field. Having identified some of the problems apparently inherent in any monetary-based economy, there's quite a long look at how a resource-based economy might be preferable (necessary?) for humanity. The movie then brings the two threads together, by explaining how the norms and values of our current society -- and the institutions within it, both secular and religious -- conspire to create an 'intellectual materialism'; a mindset that unthinkingly accepts the status quo, and leads us to act as sheep. Needless to say, the last portion of the movie is of the uplifting "it doesn't have to be this way" variety; something that I'm never going to knock anyone for suggesting.

My major criticism of the film is possibly an invalid one: lack of depth. I suspect that the target audience is people new to the topics presented, and a fairly shallow skim through some areas was the film-makers intent. Having said that, and acknowledging that most of the readers here will be familiar with much of the factual material already, I found the movie a perfectly reasonable way to spend a wet and windy weekend evening.

http://killfiat.blogspot....

so what if it contains an error or 2, you don´t have to agree with everything..
and it has some new ideas...
personally I like the original best...

/Mike

Is some people have gotten in their heads this idea is forced. No, the truth is alot of people see the potential for greater freedom from a resource economy than a currency economy. If you don't see the freedom in the resource economy then you don't have to agree with the theory, but don't put out the false assumption that any of the solutions are forced.
It's similar to joining campaign for liberty-no one forced me to become a precinct leader, hold meetings at my business or talk to my neighbors about a free economy-but if you understand freedom then it's a moral compulsion.

http://killfiat.blogspot....

This movie presented in two parts is a psychological ploy, attempting to associate Christianity with 9/11. Ask yourself, why is Jesus Christ and his followers the focus of antagonism, the only means of salvation for mankind, let me tell you, the same sources responsible for 9/11 are now attempting to antagonize people of faith as imposters. The backers and producers of this film are literally Luciferian new-agers, already discreditted by Alex Jones and other Church Christian groups.
In "New World Order mindset it is the establishment who are the Anti-Christian - to them Christianity represents an impediment to their social-evolutionary progress towards the 'absolute idea' (Karl Marx) - being Global Government.
In their mindset ( Zeitgeist) if you hold exclusive, absolutist values, this is anathema to them. If you are unchanging in your ways, if you do not adapt to the new historical paradigm, ( embrace animal rights, Wicca, new-age occultism, environmentalism, sustainable development, homosexual rights you should be expelled (exterminated). If you hold any belief in monotheism, and the belief of exclusivity of your faith, this outmoded way of thinking must be done away with and replaced with what they term higher order evolutionary thinking i.e. satanism, Luciferianism. Wicca, worship of the natural world as god, new age mysticism, Buddhism, Hinduism, or any other eastern religions are in, what is out is Christianity, Torah (Old Testament) Judaism, Islamic faith. All with monotheism are out.