Zeitgeist 2

[Spasiba]

I know the general response to the first was that it was BS, anyone see this new one? Just came out, haven't watched it, don't really plan to but I'd like to see what people here have to say. More conspiracy theories manipulated so that we go vote for Ron Paul?

[Dystisis]

Well, I saw some of it. The intro was cool. Artistically it looks good, at least what I saw.

Then I started to listen to some music befitting the videos imagery, until Ron Paul popped up in the video. Yes, he is in there. So I turned the shit off.

There are some viable points in the movie (as far as I remember, I saw the first version). Some of it is out of context. Basically, what they describe is usually correct, what they suggest or promote is usually really misguided.

[Antiprophet]

Well, I saw some of it. The intro was cool. Artistically it looks good, at least what I saw.

Then I started to listen to some music befitting the videos imagery, until Ron Paul popped up in the video. Yes, he is in there. So I turned the shit off.

There are some viable points in the movie (as far as I remember, I saw the first version). Some of it is out of context. Basically, what they describe is usually correct, what they suggest or promote is usually really misguided.

I strongly recommend watching the rest of the movie.

I didn't like the first one either, I found there was too much conspiracy / Alex Jones type stuff but I found this one very different.

Much of the ideas and concepts that they talk about during the second half of the video are fundamentally marxist. Especially when they talk about scarcity, wage slavery and when they criticize profit. I would even say that it has a strong anarcho-communist message.

Of course they never mention marxism or communist theory but that's probably a good thing (from a marxist point of view) since most people have been preconditioned to have a knee-jerk reaction against anything labeled marxist or communist (mainly due to the cold war). It's a good way to get people to listen to the message with an open mind and minimal bias.

[Kassad]

To those who were turned off by the original Zeitgeist's conspiracy-filled body, I can't stress enough how different Zeitgeist: Addendum was. If anything, left-wing supporters would greatly enjoy it, as most of it is a very heavy assault on laissez-faire capitalism, free market capitalism, free trade and the "corporat-ocracy" that is gaining a stranglehold on the world as we know it.

Now, to be fair, it also states that all political ideologies, whether it be capitalism, socialism, communism or fascism, are not applicable in the extreme manner they are presented. Still, as one marches on, it is very apparent that director Peter Joseph is very opposed to the free enterprise system, as he picks it apart for a good half an hour, while he does not even address the other ideologies he claims to be obsolete.

The movie is filled with many Marxist references, as it criticizes the wage system, money as slavery, debt as slavery and the general dominance of the class structure. In fact, for those who mentioned that they were turned off by seeing Ron Paul, the director later states that electing honest people (take that with a grain of salt) like Ron Paul is only a small part of the struggle. Though I disagree heavily with Dr. Paul's ignorance towards environmental protection and the enslavement of corporate dominance, I must say that Paul's opposition to the Federal Reserve and police state measures continue to gain heavy respect from me.

I really advise watching this.

[Abluegreen7]

They made a second?

[Kassad]

Yup. Zeitgeist: Addendum. I won't lie. I was stunned by the massive U-turn the movie took from Zeitgeist to Zeitgeist: Addendum. It goes from conspiracy to actual "Observe. Relevant factual information." There's a good half an hour on economic hitmen, which frankly, is the most revealing part.

[Abluegreen7]

Okay. Is there a link to where I can see the movie.

[Kassad]

ZeitgeistMovie.com

My post count is too low to post full links, so just punch that into your browser. The image of an eye will take you to Google Video which will play it.

[Abluegreen7]

Thank you comrade I hope you enjoy the Forum.

[IcarusAngel]

I was just watching it and about 10-20 minutes in it is indeed ron paul crazy conspiracies about the Federal Reserve and how the Federal reserve is evil and how Andrew Jackson was the last to get the US out of debt blah blah blah.

I don't really see anything wrong with a community giving a bunch of paper to another one, calling it money, and then having the people in the community trade it, so i don't have big problem with the fed reserve as a whole.

There certainly wasn't anything "leftist" in the first quarter, but i'll try and watch the rest later.

[Raúl Duke]

I actually saw Zeitgeist: Addendum and it's pretty much what Kassad said (except maybe the 1st part where they focus a lot on the fed and I hate how they did suck up to Ron Paul slightly in only one part).

However, their solution isn't anything new at all (although they make it appear so or use a tone as if it's something new)...what they are asking for sounds somewhat like anarchist-communist-technocracy...

[Spasiba]

So they suck up to Paul again this time?
Otherwise, this doesn't sound that bad, interesting that they criticize free markets, money, and capitalism (apparently). Though this might just be them trying to blow peoples minds and then say "Hey! Libertarianism is just that!" which is a lie but I could see happening. Of course if they do criticize -isms they might have a problem. Which is another annoying thing come to think of it, I know isms in general are annoying and reduce things to label, but to take away all the theory put into them is stupid, and I hope is not what they're trying to do. Plus, they're apparently taking points from our side of the scope and claiming them as their own. Not cool. Give us socialists some credit for once!

Thanks for the comments so far, keep them coming if there's more the share!

[Sendo]

The global jewish conspiracy....free masons......illuminati omfg!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Kassad]

You can't suck up to Ron Paul and criticize free-market capitalism at the same time. It's an oxymoron. Paul is first mentioned during a hearing on the Federal Reserve. He criticizes their methods of enslavement through inflation and debt, which are well-founded. Nothing negative here.

He is mentioned again later as the director is discussing the current political system, in which he criticizes those who cling to the notion that "If only we could elect honest politicians. Then we would be okay." As he says this, a "Ron Paul for President 2008" sign shows up. He's trying to explain that people view him as an honest politician, which is not a far-fetched statement.

Still, neither of these are really sucking up, as the rest of the film attacks corporate welfare, laissez-faire capitalism and monetary-based economies. Again, I recommend getting past the minor details and viewing the larger picture.

[IcarusAngel]

Well, I watched the whole thing and surprised at the turn it took once you got to part II. I think this is because the filmmaker consulted people like Perkins (author of the "Economic Hitman" book) who explained, in a Chomskyite manner, how the crimes against the third world are committed and how the exploitation occurs.

And then they do indeed advocate some kind of benevolent, libertarian-socialism mixed with technocracy. Maybe anarcho-communism, as in Libertarian-Socialism democracy would perhaps at times overrule technology, although it would in communism as well.

I really liked how they pointed out that there really are enough resources to take care of everybody right NOW, and we don't because our economic system is BROKEN.

Good film, although I still believe the federal reserve is a byproduct of a broken capitalistic system, not the cause of the capitalism being a failure, and a gold standard etc. would perhaps be even more exploitative.

But anyway, I really like their level of analysis of the system, and the individual.

Recommended.

[Kassad]

I think the only proper argument for a gold or precious metal-based standard is the fact that money creation would be restricted based on the level of the metal it is backed by. This keeps imperialist and militaristic governments like the United States from just creating more and more money for their imperialistic endeavors. This inflates the currency and will eventually decimate it, but that is how the system is fueled by a worthless currency. Now, this would not happen in a socialist state, as imperialism would not be necessary or desired. The flaws in a fiat currency system are fueled by the free enterprise system/

[Raúl Duke]

You can't suck up to Ron Paul and criticize free-market capitalism at the same time. It's an oxymoron. Paul is first mentioned during a hearing on the Federal Reserve. He criticizes their methods of enslavement through inflation and debt, which are well-founded. Nothing negative here.

He is mentioned again later as the director is discussing the current political system, in which he criticizes those who cling to the notion that "If only we could elect honest politicians. Then we would be okay." As he says this, a "Ron Paul for President 2008" sign shows up. He's trying to explain that people view him as an honest politician, which is not a far-fetched statement.


That's what's incongruous, Ron Paul is a Libertarian and thus prefers laissez-faire capitalism, which means a continuation of wage slavery (to a heighten degree; also it doesn't matter if the currency is back-up in gold/silver or not capitalism is still wage slavery.). Some of his policies would have allowed socially backward policies to take place, such a the repeal of Roe vs Wade in some states. To my knowledge he's also anti-immigrant (he opposed "anchor babies" and wants tight borders, I find such views repulsive) and was even supported by the far-right. No leftist in his right mind would support any of his domestic policies. Also, while people view him as a "honest politician" I doubt he or any politician, whether left or right, are really honest or effective in turning the system around.

Although, the rest of the movie is recommendable probably more so then the 1st one.

[Kassad]

Well, I've been converted to the left-wing movement from the right-wing libertarian movement, so I can clarify a few things. First off, Paul only supports a repealf of Roe v. Wade because he wants states to individually decide the abortion issue, justified by the 10th Amendment of the United States Constitution. Though he is very pro-life, he supports the state's right to decide.

Secondly, you are correct. Dr. Paul is for tight border security and he is against amnesty. In all honesty, there's nothing wrong with immigrants. People aren't 'illegal'. We're all humans here. Still, we need border security to protect our domestic security, but if a person wishes to become a citizen in the United States, the process should be easy and quick. It's as simple as that.

On the other hand, Ron Paul's policies would be destructive to the environment, destructive to other countries, manipulative of human interests in support of corporate ones and destructive to the working class. I revere him for his hard work towards supporting liberty, but that's about as far as it goes.

I don't know if you've heard of him, but I encourage you to look up Dennis Kucinich. He's likely the most left-wing member of Congress. He's long been an advocate of worker's rights and if you YouTube "Kucinich debates", you will hear some of his words. He is a magnificent supporter of worker's rights and personal liberty. He tried to get the Democratic nomination in 2004 and again in 2008 and since he is quite young, I hope to see him running again in 2012.

I believe that through participation in government, we can change the system from the inside and begin a slow transformation towards our ideals.

[Black Sheep]

Holy shit dude i am watching it now, i am at 1,5 hour so far and it seems like the description of a technology-based anarchist society!

edit: f*ck! F*CK!

This is the greatest movie of all time...! a thousand times better than Zeitgeist 2! and quite revolutionary (peaceful though)..

Dammit!ARGH!

[Djehuti]

What this movie is about is pretty much exactly what Marx called "utopian socialism".


But I am not anti, for many (especially americans) this is step forward, some kind of "awakening". But for us socialists this movie ain't nothing new at all, we allready know all this. Actually we know it better, these guys have not yet developed the theory of class struggle. They are far behind, but at least they know that capitalism is crap and that communism (or anarchism / socialism, call it whatever you like) is superior and something that we can actually achieve.


Spread this movie if you like, it might have good impact on may, but critizise it the same way as Marx critisised Fourier, Owen and Saint-Simon!

[Black Sheep]

Why utopian? because of the pacifist approach of the 'revolution'?

[Apeiron]

Conspiracy theories are generally a waste of time and an insult to real political thought. Thus, I found the first zeitgeist to be a bit of both (albeit well constructed and entertaining).

This one is better, but not without its problems. Many of the critiques leveled at 'monetary-ism' are exclusively compatible with capitalism, which the documentary goes on to deny (using china as the archetype of a communist state? socialism/communism are based upon competition?). The analysis of labor here is a bit abstruse.. there is no need to make an appeal to debt in order to criticize the exploitative nature of labor under capitalism - there already exist a number of solid critiques available. Also, the word 'slavery' is applied to any exploitative or undesirable social relationship, and thus inaccurate and sloppy... seems like the aim is for shock value over any notion of rigor or clarity.

The technocratic utopia clearly advocated for in the last hour or so is bizarre, and is presented as though its logically necessary following the analysis offered in the first half which is a shoddy step (also, aside from the fact that it will be a society structured upon 'resource based' [i.e. non-monetary] economy and thus benefit from vastly superior technology, little is said about it). I found the interview with the 'economic hitman' to be a highlight, notably for the interesting (and in some ways compelling) theory of contemporary imperialism - though aspects of it are a bit conspiratorial, and once again not necessarily the product of 'monetaryism' rather than being intrinsic to global capitalism as such (instrumentalized through the structure of debt, the IMF, etc.).

Ultimately, I think the filmmaker fails to construct a convincing argument against monetaryism as opposed to an argument against free enterprise, which in the last analysis comprises much of what is problematized here (ruthless self-interest, maximization of profit, competition, exploitative relations, etc.).

[Mindtoaster]

LOL!

So Zeitgeist: Addmendum has "dissapointed" Alex Jones who says "Alot of things talked about in this movie were thought up by Karl Marx and Engels, and the globalists know this and they're trying to do this a different way"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EyQtN4HY4Ko&feature=bz301

Anyway, Addmendum is *Awesome*! Its basically a 2-hour movie making the case for Anarcho-Communism without ever actually saying it.

Its basically conspiracy free, and I reccomend it to all leftists

[Kassad]

Alex Jones doesn't like anything without warped, ridiculous assertions every few minutes.

[Red_Dialectics]

What this movie is about is pretty much exactly what Marx called "utopian socialism".


That is EXACTLY what I was thinking throughout the whole movie. I saw it and was like "congrats on reinventing the wheel. Welcome to The Left. We've been fighting for that for what, 160+ years now?!"

I seriously lol'd at their "tactics" "Buy a small car! Visit our website! Make people watch our video!"

[Red_Dialectics]

^^ And megaphones. Jones loves those damn things. "IF I SAY IT LOUD ENOUGH THAT MUST MEAN ITS TRUE"

[Dystisis]

Watched this movie now, I must say it was good. Much more relevant to this site than the former was. It exposes some interesting flaws about the capitalistic system.

One big obvious mistake it made was that the movie portrays communism as another form of monetary system, which it obviously is not... It is THE non-monetarist system post-capitalism. Anyway, pretty good movie.

[Davie zepeda]

To me this just a Recruitment video for there cause. Not a bad one thou much of the things they say are romantic but they need to come back to reality a little .A reasource economy is pretty far filched if any one can defend that go ahead but all i know is with out money you can't buy resources lol.

[Davie zepeda]

IN less your nation is very industrialized which i think only here united states is that industrialized.

[Black Sheep]

Anyway, Addmendum is *Awesome*! Its basically a 2-hour movie making the case for Anarcho-Communism without ever actually saying it.
That is exactly what came to my mind while watching it!

And the utilization of an alternative way' to critisize the monetary system,labor, etc Is a plus to me..Remember that this film is directed firstly to the dumbed down american middle class,who think capitalism=good, socialism and 'state economy' =BAD

and i like the part about the 'self appointed guardian of the status quo', it was like quoting myself!:cool:

[Kassad]

http://thezeitgeistmovement.com/

More details and in the future, it will include a FAQ, materials and an assortment of other information.

[bootleg42]

Everyone.....you know this movie is also supporting the complete rejection of the political system?????

It's trying to create the "anti-politic" feelings Noam Chomsky discussed years ago when talking of these paranoid white middle class free-market militia conspiracy theory movements. This has it's dangers to it.

[GPDP]

Everyone.....you know this movie is also supporting the complete rejection of the political system?????

It's trying to create the "anti-politic" feelings Noam Chomsky discussed years ago when talking of these paranoid white middle class free-market militia conspiracy theory movements. This has it's dangers to it.

Hmmm, care to point out where Chomsky said this? I'm interested.

[Kassad]

Well, rejecting the political system is code for 'let whoever doesn't reject the political system win'. I would hope that we all embrace the political system so that we can gain control and reform it in the way that is required.

[progressive_lefty]

Any association between Zeitgeist and the left is embarrassing. It's a good movie to watch, but is full of pure rubbish. None of the claims can be supported with solid evidence.

[Kassad]

With Zeitgeist 1, there are many intellectual and factual holes, but I find Zeitgeist Addendum to be of an entirely different breed.

[cleef]

i think the maker bothered to do his research second time round as the second movie seems to have alot more weight behind it...

[Kassad]

The problem with Zeitgeist 1 is that it isn't an original documentary. As a person who's seen all the movies it's based on, I can tell you that everything from Part II and III is almost directly quoted from documentaries like Esoteric Agenda, Money as Debt, Freedom to Fascism and a few others. Even images and quotes are directly cited from these movies. Addendum was completely original, thus why it stands out as much more credible.

If you find a few hours, watch Freedom to Fascism and Esoteric Agenda. Then watch Zeitgeist 1. You'll see that many of the pictures, facts and quotes are taken directly from those other movies. Addendum is a much more developed opinion.

[cleef]

^^^ yeh i have to admit quite alot of the material seemed familiar, although i couldnt work out where it was from (i only saw zeigeist 1 last year and freedom to fascism i had watched a few years previous)

[Kassad]

All the quotes (Wilson, Rockefeller, Morgan etc.) are from Freedom to Fascism. A lot of pictures, assumptions and claims are directly quoted from Esoteric Agenda. I was actually pretty disappointed to find that out, since it makes Zeitgeist just seem like nothing new, just all recycled statements and claims.

[Decolonize The Left]

For those of you hung-up on Ron Paul being in the movie, did you note the part where his entire campaign was labeled as worthless and meaningless (like all other campaigns)? I don't really see why there's so much issue over him being in there and being labeled 'honest' - sure it's silly, but the overall message isn't to vote at all.

Overall a great film which is perfect for the American population which won't do any sort of purposeful research and reading into Marx.

- August

[Winter]

I urge everybody on this message board to watch Zeitgeist: Addendum.

Watch the WHOLE thing. This is by no means a libertarian propaganda documentary. Alex Jones does not even like this movie, so make no mistake.

Please take the time to watch it. I feel this is the future of what the Left has been struggling for for the longest time.

[Honggweilo]

LOL!

So Zeitgeist: Addmendum has "dissapointed" Alex Jones who says "Alot of things talked about in this movie were thought up by Karl Marx and Engels, and the globalists know this and they're trying to do this a different way"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EyQtN4HY4Ko&feature=bz301

Anyway, Addmendum is *Awesome*! Its basically a 2-hour movie making the case for Anarcho-Communism without ever actually saying it.

Its basically conspiracy free, and I reccomend it to all leftists
Hahahaha if alex jones hates it and labels it marxist, it must be worthwhile :lol:

Anyway, from what i reading here, It looks like a fine example of dialectics in practice. Trying to give an analysis of a social system through practical and material observations, and then comming to this conclusion. Its basically revaluing the thesis of marxism to modern day capitalism without even being aware of it. I should go and watch it this time.

[Abluegreen7]

Alex Jones is a Nutjob!

This movie is good!

[DesertShark]

I watched it last night...awesome movie! It really broke down the monetary system in a way that was easily understandable. It just confirmed my dislike of money and my belief that is fake and useless (well useful to the people in power who use it to control others).


I don't really see anything wrong with a community giving a bunch of paper to another one, calling it money, and then having the people in the community trade it, so i don't have big problem with the fed reserve as a whole.
It's not about communities exchanging paper, it's about banks creating money from the air and the fact that any money in our country now (money from the federal reserve) is a debt that can never be paid off because if it was, there would be no money in circulation.


This one is better, but not without its problems. Many of the critiques leveled at 'monetary-ism' are exclusively compatible with capitalism, which the documentary goes on to deny (using china as the archetype of a communist state? socialism/communism are based upon competition?). The analysis of labor here is a bit abstruse.. there is no need to make an appeal to debt in order to criticize the exploitative nature of labor under capitalism - there already exist a number of solid critiques available. Also, the word 'slavery' is applied to any exploitative or undesirable social relationship, and thus inaccurate and sloppy... seems like the aim is for shock value over any notion of rigor or clarity.
I thought they said China was a capitalist state, not a communist one? One definition of slaver is (from dictionary.com): "1. the state of being under the control of another person," which they showed through wages.


Ultimately, I think the filmmaker fails to construct a convincing argument against monetaryism as opposed to an argument against free enterprise, which in the last analysis comprises much of what is problematized here (ruthless self-interest, maximization of profit, competition, exploitative relations, etc.).
In my opinion, there was a good argument against a monetary system that is not backed by anything, a fiat currency which is what is in place now.


Any association between Zeitgeist and the left is embarrassing. It's a good movie to watch, but is full of pure rubbish. None of the claims can be supported with solid evidence.
You can look up all the stuff about the federal reserve and money in our country, and it is true. Same with what the banks are doing.

-DesertShark

[Oneironaut]

I really enjoyed the movie. It was a lot better than the first. I couldn't quite follow how the government increases money in the market though. The movie basically stated that they get issued the paper money from the bank and put 10% in reserve. but then they essentially take the amount that was issued to them and re-add that amount to the "extra reserve"(9 billion becomes 19 billion?)? the movie says this is done "simply out of thin air". I think they may have been a little to simple in their explanation.