I've never even been so happy

[logan86]

Hi guys

ok, i know i said that i was going to leave that awful zeitgeist movement forum behind but i just couldnt help going back to argue my point.

i made a big thread about the whole movement is hypocritical because it claims to be able to save humanity by sitting around touting ideologies about the future but at the same time refusing to take part in the current system in order to actually change things. the post was really really long and eventually the actual thread grew to over 100 replies (thats a lot around there.) anyway everyone totally let loose on me about how i was uneducated and just didnt get it. then the thread actually got locked which just shows how much they cant handle any criticism whatsoever.

And then the best thing EVER. a few days later i came accross another post and saw this

I recently asked Noam Chomsky about the Zeitgeist Movement. His reply:

"I don't regard The zeitgeist Movement as an activist movement. Rather, it seems to me to be a very passive movement that is misled by doctrines that have a pleasant sound, but collapse on analysis. Among them is the idea that we should "stop supporting the system" and should not "fight it," that is seek to change and overcome it. That means that we should withdraw into passivity. Nothing could be more welcome to those with power. My feeling is that however sincere the leaders and participants may be, the movement is seriously misguided. It is not leading towards change, but is undermining it by encouraging passivity and withdrawal from engagement, and offering a false sense that some real alternative is being proposed, except in terms so abstract and divorced from reality as to be virtually meaningless."


Thank you.

And now im all like HA. now my ideas dont look so crazy after all. now that arguably one of the greatest political minds and one of the greatest political activists of our time agrees with me. now that literally he is saying the same thing as me almost word for word that i said in my original thread. is he uneducated? does he just not get it?

that has literally become my ultimate ace in the hole for any argument now. oh well Noam Chomsky agrees with me so what do you think about that

The fact is my views werent influenced by him or anyone else because i said it first. i said what i said from the heart in that thread i made. and then i find someone truly credible actually saying the same thing. HAHAHA

Im sorry guys i dont mean to sound really petty but i have been arguing these points with those guys a lot. i was really starting to believe that maybe i just didnt get it or that i was uneducated. but this has been the biggest boost in confidence i could have imagined and now i couldnt care less what the crappy zeitgeist movement or its members think.

Anyway i dont mean to sound petty but like i said i was really starting to waver there for a moment but now i just cant stop smiling. also its 5:37am and i really cant sleep so this couldnt really have come at a better time

peace

[X2-Eliah]

All right, now on to a civil response..

By your quote I gather that an anonymous person replied to a conspiracy thread and claimed that he had contacted N. Chomsky and had received the quoted response.

There are several issues with that. First, there is always the chance that the claim may just be fake - a common thing on the internet. Second, there is no guarantee that the quote in the ""s is 100% accurate. We all know how quotes can be twisted - the mainstream media is a good example of that. Third, assuming that the reply and quote is accurate, there is this: "[Zeitgeist] - a very passive movement that is misled by doctrines that have a pleasant sound, but collapse on analysis." So N. Chomski himself says that the doctrines (ideological base) of Zeigeist are likeable, but turn out to be wrong/false on analysis. He implies that the pasivity is not the only doctrine that is wrong in the Zeigeist ("Among them is the...").


On the whole, yes, your original post was backed up by a supposed quote from a well-known political activist. The thing is, conspiracy theory supporters almost never believe cold, hard facts, so asking them to believe a forum post claiming to have a direct reply from this Chomski is.. well, overly optimistic. Though in the end, what you yourself believe in is what matters. Arguing with fanatics is never a good idea anyway.


"and now i couldnt care less what the crappy zeitgeist movement or its members think. " That's good. I would have phrased it otherwise, but the premise is good.


P.S. The only thing that is really offsetting about all this is how much influence a popular name has on you. I recall your topic on the Zeigeist, and the part about the twin towers and fire. Iirc, you argued and asked solid proof for any claim against what Zeigeist implied, not relying on what people claiming to be "in the know" said.. Now, you accept a supposed opinion of a political activist as solid proof for your own belief.. A bit of a double-standard, actually. Or am I reading the post wrong?

[logan86]

Im sorry but i think you may have misunderstood me. i dont care who it is who agrees with me. i've been in a me against hundreds of peole situation and now i have anyone on my side of the discussion wheather directly or not.

Also i have looked into this further and it seems the quote is actually real so thats good at least. i should also point out that it was put forward by an avid supporter or the zeitgeist movement. also PJ himself even got very angry about this and couldnt really handle it.

But mostly you have to understand, im going to get banned from there just for peacefully speaking my mind. one of my threads literally DISAPPEARED. another one was locked. the whole thing is ridiculous.

And it was 5 in the morning. my confidence was ebbing away. im going to be totally silenced and my argument was getting weak. but then i get this kind of charecter saying the same thing as me. i was just like haha gutted zeitgeist losers. thats all.

So try and look at is as something which helped my confidence a bit when i needed it, and i just wanted to tell people, i must say x2 eliah i find your interpretation of this to have been extremely skeptical.

[Dragoongfa]

You mean that someone actually gives a crap about the zeidgeist movement?

The system is fine for humanity, the problem lies with humanity .

[eladan]

i dont care who it is who agrees with me.

Hmm. Kinda contradicted by:

my confidence was ebbing away. im going to be totally silenced and my argument was getting weak.

Going onto that forum and essentially attacking the very reason that most of them are on that forum? You'd need to expect that you won't get any support, and that you won't make headway. Losing confidence because you aren't says that you went there with unrealistic expectations.

But hey - worth a try, right?

[logan86]

yeah i guess its my fault for getting no support but i cant handle their cult mentality and superiority when they talk about this magical future. also i already have had some success, several other users have also started to see that place for what it really is. some however are still deluded enough to think that they have any say in the direction of the venus project. i feel as if im actually doing a public service for these people

[philip_hughes]

Don't lose hope logan, but realise you won't make much headway either. I spent a lot of my adolescent life heavily involved with, for all practical purposes, a cult. That means I understand the fundamentalist mind very well. The zeitgeist people and their core beliefs are hard to shake and all the logic in the world, nor the best names for that matter will not convince people so heavily lead.

Don't be smug though, for I believe that we all have illogical strongholds in our mind, no matter how rational we are or claim to be. Tis the nature of our humanity.

[BugMeister]

Chomsky is a straight talker, if anyone can cut through the bull, he can..

- it must have come as a ray of light to realize that your misgivings were based on solid foundations..

- the truth will set you free..

[logan86]

it was indeed a ray of light. i now feel as though i dont have to feel so annoyed with that whole movement or the venus project. i can finally be at peace that im not just the only one who doesnt get it. but their cult like mentality makes it impossible to speak to them on any level no matter how logical or even just emotional.

but now i just feel relieved more than anything. and for obvious reasons i feel a little bit proud as well because having ones views validated by someone like chomsky is going to have that effect.

obviously though i do understand that i dont know everything and that doesnt make me right about everything. but just this one time its just like, hell yeah

[Tsar_of_Cows]

There's a great American expression - "you can't fix stupid". And you can't, don't try.

To me, stupidity comes with the lack of an inquisitive mind - if you aren't willing to ask questions, see things from different angles or do a bit of introspection, then you are stupid. The problem with cults is that they are a type of enforced small thinking - the cult has all the answers so you don't need to ask questions, don't question the cult because the cult is right, don't disobey the cult because the cult is right, etc. It doesn't lend itself to critical thinking because, inevitably, you'd have to be stupid to believe that stuff. Ergo, the people who are in cults, tend to be stupid (no offence to Mr Hughes), and therefore they aren't going to listen to you or question their beliefs.

It's the same problem with any type of "Memetic Virus" as they've been called - it's an infectious mindset that self propagates and has defensive features built into it. Introspection and the ability to question your own beliefs are needed to think outside the box, and this doesn't come naturally to everyone...

Sometimes, with a lot of time and effort, you can win them over, but usually the only ones who'll listen are the ones who have had their doubts... Movements/Cults attract all sorts of people for all sorts of reasons, and the ones that joined hoping to find answers to questions are your best bet - they aren't afraid of answers or questions and can eventually be won over.

Sometimes these movements collapse and they all realise they've been daft. Usually this is due to internal stuff - I recall one cult that thought the cult leader could bring people back from the dead, after about 3 months of trying, they realised she was crazy and had no mystical powers and they'd wasted 3 months of their lives. Still, 3 months is a long time to be taken in by such blatant crap, but such is the power of wanting to believe.

[logan86]

well said tsar. the problem is that the enforced mindset and rules make it impossible for them to question anything. but still i feel that my work is done because a snowball has started rolling there now.

And its true like you said, you cant reach the really deeply involved ones, only the other new guys who are still undecided. at least i may have saved a few of them the wasted time and effort of even dealing with their futurist technocrat cult. and yet more people quickly realise on their own that those people arent interested in helping anybody but themselves, and no matter what their intentions are, they are simply irrelevant.

and they will always be irrelevant as long as they choose to remain totally idle and yet still attempt to maintain the moral highground becuase of simple beliefs with no basis in reality or actions. argh. there i go again im starting to get annoyed. its funny because they affect me in no way whatsoever and yet it all gets to me sooo much. but i guess its good to take a stand at least sometimes.

[RavenIII]

When I went through my mid-teens I had a period where I'd follow trails of conspiracy theories, I wouldn't necessarily believe them - but I would have some interest. In the end though, my main turn off is those 1-4 hour long videos which seem to go over the same "facts", repeating it again, and again in different flavours. I quickly lost interest and really didn't want to waste any more time.

I think people should be bothered about liberties and rights being taken away from them, in any situation - but governments aren't exactly renowned for their ability to organise well. Everything is done by bureaucracy... and frankly, it takes forever anyway.

One of my final lessons in fanaticism was a fellow pupil in school who was a Jehovah's witness - he was questioned heavily by some fellow pupils at the time about his faith, God and various other topics... most of which he didn't seem capable of answering all that well. I don't necessarily blame him for this, but he was still held firmly in his faith (more power to him for it) - but it pretty much ensured I'd never have much faith in a (preset) religion.

I've always favoured a few moral stories I had when I was young, they mostly focused on trying to be essentially a virtuous person - based on tales of animals (such as the trapped/netted lion and the mouse which chews through the rope to free him), boasting travellers and what-not over any religious book... although I had my fair share of those too.

[LV]

You mean that someone actually gives a crap about the zeidgeist movement?

same box of frogs as the rest of these disenfranchised movements

If we can have Thetans then anything is possible.

[ClearSky]

Bugmeister wrote:

Chomsky is a straight talker, if anyone can cut through the bull, he can..

No offence, but...


Whilst I don't doubt Chomsky's credentials it has to be said that in the last few years he has become as self-serving and conspiracy-laden as the very people he used to rail about.

Read the transcripts of his debate with the late Michel Foucault and that will give you a flavour of the man.

Actually, when I mentioned (a couple of years ago) that I was reading some his work to an American associate they nearly died laughing.

As they say, YMMV!

Icky

[philip_hughes]

Not offended tsar, it wasn't my choice. I was schooled there, my parents only realised what was happening many years down the track, long after those guys had unsuccessfully tried to indoctrinate me.

I actually agree with you. Go figure.

[BugMeister]

Bugmeister wrote:

Chomsky is a straight talker, if anyone can cut through the bull, he can..

No offence, but...


Whilst I don't doubt Chomsky's credentials it has to be said that in the last few years he has become as self-serving and conspiracy-laden as the very people he used to rail about.

Read the transcripts of his debate with the late Michel Foucault and that will give you a flavour of the man.

Actually, when I mentioned (a couple of years ago) that I was reading some his work to an American associate they nearly died laughing.

As they say, YMMV!

Icky

Give us your views on liberal-socialism, then we can all have a laugh..

[ClearSky]

I would love to give my views on socio-liberalism but I just don't have any set ones. And any views I do have are liable to change at the whims of continuing education.

You think Chomsky is the man for the job?

Fine.

I just find there is a touch of Dawkinsesque fanatacism about him these days.

There is no doubt that Chomsky has an agenda these days, and it is one that serves only him.

In my somewhat impish opinion of course

Icky

[BugMeister]

Chomsky is just one among many..
We're living in a semantic nightmare - for example, have you noticed how often we use superlatives, these days..??

- words like "incredible" and "amazing" appear all over the place,
- often these words are used inaccurately, more often they're just plain nonsense - even in context..

Nothing changes - spin doctors aren't a new phenomenon
- it's just a new name for the same old thing..

- politicians, advertisers, false guru's and fake priests, etc..
- all are masters of double-talk..

I just think it's good that logan86 saw the wood among the trees, is all..

[logan86]

yay thankyou bug meister