When a police man asks "Do you understand" did you know ...?

[pulsar]

big up GV1, nice thread... good to see that this stuff is getting about. i knew about a fair bit about what happens when you give your details to the police and about statutes etc.. but i just watched that 5-part John Harris vid and learned a lot more - the bit about registration and how we submit ownership of everything is a proper eye-opener

If you're interested in that you should watch the Zeitgeist documentary series, even more of an eye-opener since it details how the whole worlds capitalist economic system works!

yeah i've seen the shiteguise films thanks... they do reveal a lot of truth about monetary systems etc (which i was already aware of) but they mix it in with a lot of lies and deceit... i'm gonna sound bare tinfoil hat crew here but it stinks of illuminati / new world order if you ask me. i think zeitgeist and the venus project are basically cults and these films are brainwashing tools. i could go into it but it's looooong.... do a bit of research for yourself if you can be bothered

take zeitgeist with a pinch of salt btw!

^

I do my own research, ta To further this, please could you point out the lies and deceit? I'm sure it would be useful for us all. To add, either way you look at it we need a resource-based economy to survive or one day we'll have nothing left and will reach that point without seeing it coming! Zeitgeist isn't the only movement that's advocating it, I know as I have researched around the subject (mostly from an ecological psychology perspective, mainstream psychology is way too intracranial-focussed for its own good) - Theodore Roszak in particular mentions it in his book 'Ecopsychology' (it's good because he's a journalist not a 'psychologist' so points out the logical holes in the discipline, it's starting to be incorporated even though it was advocated in the 1800s by the German Gestalt psychologists).

or even better watch The Corporation.


As polemics go it seems relatively well researched and has alot of good views from both sides of the corporate wall.

Looks good, cheers, will check it out! Freud tried to do the same thing and this also sounds similar to the aforementioned 'Ecopsychology' book (which, I suppose, is a self-reflection on the commercial face of the military-industrial complex).

good to hear that you do your own research, most people i've come across who talk about zeitgeist as a good thing have not looked into it at all. it found it very interesting when i looked into the people behind it and where they've got a lot of their information from (most of it is credited at the end of the films if you want to check it out yourself) and also their links to the un and other organisations associated with the new world order. there's a hidden agenda, zeitgeist/the venus project are not what they seem imo...
safe-tea

[Carljnrendora]

Great thread, very interesting and all, but...

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Freeman_on ... _Straw_man

I'm with the Rational Wiki on this one for now. Read a load of things online about the Freeman stuff and yet to see any of point to any actual source materials. Some of it is well written and some of it is written exceptionally badly, but either way - it's just words. None of it appears to be backed up by anything. I suppose their response to this would be that of course there are no sources, or the big conspiracy would be exposed!

I don't know...best of luck if you want to try it, but I imagine it's quite hard to do without ending up being a massive hypocrite.

This whole article is relatively biased. It's kind of insinuating that Freemen just don't want to follow rules. They don't mind rules, it's just that when the authorities use them to gain power over you that they find it wrong.

"Ultimately, the law derives its authority from the fact that the state has the means and the will to use force to impose it. You can argue that the authorities have no jurisdiction over you, and you can choose not to recognise their authority, but as long as the authorities have force to back up their rules they can enforce sanctions against you. Freeman would argue that this would be unlawful imprisonment - but at the end of the day you'd still be in jail."

This excerpt from the page basically shows how unwilling people are to stand up, and gives up on the fact that we have any rights. It basically says the authorities can do what they want with us and this is what freemen fighting against.

[test_recordings]

big up GV1, nice thread... good to see that this stuff is getting about. i knew about a fair bit about what happens when you give your details to the police and about statutes etc.. but i just watched that 5-part John Harris vid and learned a lot more - the bit about registration and how we submit ownership of everything is a proper eye-opener

If you're interested in that you should watch the Zeitgeist documentary series, even more of an eye-opener since it details how the whole worlds capitalist economic system works!

yeah i've seen the shiteguise films thanks... they do reveal a lot of truth about monetary systems etc (which i was already aware of) but they mix it in with a lot of lies and deceit... i'm gonna sound bare tinfoil hat crew here but it stinks of illuminati / new world order if you ask me. i think zeitgeist and the venus project are basically cults and these films are brainwashing tools. i could go into it but it's looooong.... do a bit of research for yourself if you can be bothered

take zeitgeist with a pinch of salt btw!

^

I do my own research, ta To further this, please could you point out the lies and deceit? I'm sure it would be useful for us all. To add, either way you look at it we need a resource-based economy to survive or one day we'll have nothing left and will reach that point without seeing it coming! Zeitgeist isn't the only movement that's advocating it, I know as I have researched around the subject (mostly from an ecological psychology perspective, mainstream psychology is way too intracranial-focussed for its own good) - Theodore Roszak in particular mentions it in his book 'Ecopsychology' (it's good because he's a journalist not a 'psychologist' so points out the logical holes in the discipline, it's starting to be incorporated even though it was advocated in the 1800s by the German Gestalt psychologists).

or even better watch The Corporation.


As polemics go it seems relatively well researched and has alot of good views from both sides of the corporate wall.

Looks good, cheers, will check it out! Freud tried to do the same thing and this also sounds similar to the aforementioned 'Ecopsychology' book (which, I suppose, is a self-reflection on the commercial face of the military-industrial complex).

good to hear that you do your own research, most people i've come across who talk about zeitgeist as a good thing have not looked into it at all. it found it very interesting when i looked into the people behind it and where they've got a lot of their information from (most of it is credited at the end of the films if you want to check it out yourself) and also their links to the un and other organisations associated with the new world order. there's a hidden agenda, zeitgeist/the venus project are not what they seem imo...
safe-tea

UN, eh? I thought Zeitgeist was anti-UN since it's un-nationalist, the 2nd documentary actually put me off when it basically said we need 1 world government as it had just trounced every other similar concept but when the 3rd elaborated with a explanation of the logistics and social systems that would be incorporated I opened up to it.
One thing is for sure though: all the material and moral code being advocated sounds very individualistic and white European-descended American-derived even though it's more of a collectivist society being advocated. Don't get me wrong as the semantics could be an 'artifact' from the use of English but it still needs to be checked as I don't like the idea of a global monoculture because that's bad for survival in evolution. I wonder what, say, northeast-Asian people think about it since it fits in with traditional philosophies from there (as like many other traditional tribes cultures).
What happens to the humans that live outside of the proposed society too? For all the talk of adopting traditional human values of solidarity and mutual co-operation there's no mention of the traditional societies they're derived from (though this is implied with the recall of Hobbes who said that there should be enough resources left over for others when acquiring private property).
I'm down for the general idea though, for the amount of stuff you might own you can't use it all at once so it makes sense to book it when you want it and if everyone was chipping you'd have some right good stuff! This isn't even a new concept either: in the 60s Alan Watts was banging on about how machines could do all the work and we'd have a leisure-based economy, the reason being that it was technically and logistically feasible even then! The only reason it wasn't was because then no-one would have to work and then the capital owners would be leveled with everyone else. America has been self-sufficient since the 1920s too, so content was the populace that the famous psychologist John B. Watson went in to marketing to stimulate consumerism that would fuel 'economic growth' since obviously when everyone's got everything they actually need and don't buy any more that leads to 'economic stagnation' (though really it should the goal).
Psychology has been twisted in all this, from a tool for good to a torture in marketing and advertising it has basically legalised mass hypnotism since people cannot escape from all the corporate messages. TV is rotting away society and people can't notice without getting away from it for long enough to realise but don't because it's so inculcated, if people spent as much time watching TV shows of 'light entertainment' the world's problems (i.e. human problems) would be well on the way to being fixed

[ashley]

UN, eh? I thought Zeitgeist was anti-UN since it's un-nationalist, the 2nd documentary actually put me off when it basically said we need 1 world government as it had just trounced every other similar concept but when the 3rd elaborated with a explanation of the logistics and social systems that would be incorporated I opened up to it.
One thing is for sure though: all the material and moral code being advocated sounds very individualistic and white European-descended American-derived even though it's more of a collectivist society being advocated. Don't get me wrong as the semantics could be an 'artifact' from the use of English but it still needs to be checked as I don't like the idea of a global monoculture because that's bad for survival in evolution. I wonder what, say, northeast-Asian people think about it since it fits in with traditional philosophies from there (as like many other traditional tribes cultures).
What happens to the humans that live outside of the proposed society too? For all the talk of adopting traditional human values of solidarity and mutual co-operation there's no mention of the traditional societies they're derived from (though this is implied with the recall of Hobbes who said that there should be enough resources left over for others when acquiring private property).
I'm down for the general idea though, for the amount of stuff you might own you can't use it all at once so it makes sense to book it when you want it and if everyone was chipping you'd have some right good stuff! This isn't even a new concept either: in the 60s Alan Watts was banging on about how machines could do all the work and we'd have a leisure-based economy, the reason being that it was technically and logistically feasible even then! The only reason it wasn't was because then no-one would have to work and then the capital owners would be leveled with everyone else. America has been self-sufficient since the 1920s too, so content was the populace that the famous psychologist John B. Watson went in to marketing to stimulate consumerism that would fuel 'economic growth' since obviously when everyone's got everything they actually need and don't buy any more that leads to 'economic stagnation' (though really it should the goal).
Psychology has been twisted in all this, from a tool for good to a torture in marketing and advertising it has basically legalised mass hypnotism since people cannot escape from all the corporate messages. TV is rotting away society and people can't notice without getting away from it for long enough to realise but don't because it's so inculcated, if people spent as much time watching TV shows of 'light entertainment' the world's problems (i.e. human problems) would be well on the way to being fixed

[abelard]

UN, eh? I thought Zeitgeist was anti-UN since it's un-nationalist, the 2nd documentary actually put me off when it basically said we need 1 world government as it had just trounced every other similar concept but when the 3rd elaborated with a explanation of the logistics and social systems that would be incorporated I opened up to it.
One thing is for sure though: all the material and moral code being advocated sounds very individualistic and white European-descended American-derived even though it's more of a collectivist society being advocated. Don't get me wrong as the semantics could be an 'artifact' from the use of English but it still needs to be checked as I don't like the idea of a global monoculture because that's bad for survival in evolution. I wonder what, say, northeast-Asian people think about it since it fits in with traditional philosophies from there (as like many other traditional tribes cultures).
What happens to the humans that live outside of the proposed society too? For all the talk of adopting traditional human values of solidarity and mutual co-operation there's no mention of the traditional societies they're derived from (though this is implied with the recall of Hobbes who said that there should be enough resources left over for others when acquiring private property).
I'm down for the general idea though, for the amount of stuff you might own you can't use it all at once so it makes sense to book it when you want it and if everyone was chipping you'd have some right good stuff! This isn't even a new concept either: in the 60s Alan Watts was banging on about how machines could do all the work and we'd have a leisure-based economy, the reason being that it was technically and logistically feasible even then! The only reason it wasn't was because then no-one would have to work and then the capital owners would be leveled with everyone else. America has been self-sufficient since the 1920s too, so content was the populace that the famous psychologist John B. Watson went in to marketing to stimulate consumerism that would fuel 'economic growth' since obviously when everyone's got everything they actually need and don't buy any more that leads to 'economic stagnation' (though really it should the goal).
Psychology has been twisted in all this, from a tool for good to a torture in marketing and advertising it has basically legalised mass hypnotism since people cannot escape from all the corporate messages. TV is rotting away society and people can't notice without getting away from it for long enough to realise but don't because it's so inculcated, if people spent as much time watching TV shows of 'light entertainment' the world's problems (i.e. human problems) would be well on the way to being fixed

boom! i'm gonna use that

[test_recordings]

UN, eh? I thought Zeitgeist was anti-UN since it's un-nationalist, the 2nd documentary actually put me off when it basically said we need 1 world government as it had just trounced every other similar concept but when the 3rd elaborated with a explanation of the logistics and social systems that would be incorporated I opened up to it.

One thing is for sure though: all the material and moral code being advocated sounds very individualistic and white European-descended American-derived even though it's more of a collectivist society being advocated. Don't get me wrong as the semantics could be an 'artifact' from the use of English but it still needs to be checked as I don't like the idea of a global monoculture because that's bad for survival in evolution. I wonder what, say, northeast-Asian people think about it since it fits in with traditional philosophies from there (as like many other traditional tribes cultures).

What happens to the humans that live outside of the proposed society too? For all the talk of adopting traditional human values of solidarity and mutual co-operation there's no mention of the traditional societies they're derived from (though this is implied with the recall of Hobbes who said that there should be enough resources left over for others when acquiring private property).

I'm down for the general idea though, for the amount of stuff you might own you can't use it all at once so it makes sense to book it when you want it and if everyone was chipping you'd have some right good stuff! This isn't even a new concept either: in the 60s Alan Watts was banging on about how machines could do all the work and we'd have a leisure-based economy, the reason being that it was technically and logistically feasible even then! The only reason it wasn't was because then no-one would have to work and then the capital owners would be leveled with everyone else. America has been self-sufficient since the 1920s too, so content was the populace that the famous psychologist John B. Watson went in to marketing to stimulate consumerism that would fuel 'economic growth' since obviously when everyone's got everything they actually need and don't buy any more that leads to 'economic stagnation' (though really it should the goal).

Psychology has been twisted in all this, from a tool for good to a torture in marketing and advertising it has basically legalised mass hypnotism since people cannot escape from all the corporate messages. TV is rotting away society and people can't notice without getting away from it for long enough to realise but don't because it's so inculcated, if people spent as much time watching TV shows of 'light entertainment' the world's problems (i.e. human problems) would be well on the way to being fixed

Any better then?

[clifford_-]

some interesting points there! why the fuck dont we have a leisure society?

[noam]

i experience a leisure based lifestyle

it is most leisurely i can assure you

[Pedro Sánchez]

i experience a leisure based lifestyle

it is most leisurely i can assure you

Same here, we must be part of some type of leisure club
hangs head in shame, and grabs coat on the way out, while tumble weeds blows through the hideout

[test_recordings]

some interesting points there! why the fuck dont we have a leisure society?

Because the majority of people are under the apparent illusion we need money to live and capitalism is the only economic system that works, has worked and ever will. It's quite funny and also quite sad that Belarus is selling off 90% of its planned economy, now the bins aren't collected, everything is expensive but they have more political freedom.. There's a joke there that a women has a nightmare about the fridge being well-stocked with food and milk, the streets are clean and the bins are empty and when she tells her husband of this nightmare he asks what's wrong with it?
"I thought the communists were back in power"

There is no reason why we can't have a more egalitarian system and political freedom, the current way we are subjugated is derived from the wave of nationalism that swept about in the late 1800's. A little reform beyond AV wouldn't go amiss, being able to recall MPs like California can would go a lot further for a start...