August 6, 2010

TVP Critics & Their Antics 2

Well, didn't take long for my posts to get noticed by some guys from the Conspiracy Science forums, although to be honest I expected them a bit sooner. (Did leave links all over the place.) The thread involving my blog is called: 'Another asinine pro TVP/TZM blog defending voiceofracism.' I'll get back to the 'asinine' part later but it is true I probably said somethings that upset certain people and it's only natural that they take up a defensive position. Whether that's righteous is another matter.
Yes I defended Devan Evans' blogpost criticizing some players over at the CS forums, because in my opinion the critique is perfectly justified. His contribution showed that some folks weren't as squeaky clean as they pretended to be. Like Evans I come to the conclusion that some people made a mess of things themselves and should look inward instead of blaming the Zeitgeist forum moderators, Peter Joseph or the movement itself. It's that simple.

Quick recap of some of the people I (and Devan Evans) addressed. Nanos, seems like a fairly decent bloke from what I have gathered yet couldn't stop criticizing the movement on a regular basis. Most striking of all, from my perspective, the moment he got banned on the ZG forum he pops up over the CS forum and lets face it, that place is already known to harbor fierce critics. In a way some people would look on that as another justification.
Thanks to Ed W. it's obvious now that he isn't Ed B - another guy who had a beef with the Zeitgeist movement. I'm Ed V. so I think we can all agree that it is a little bit confusing at times. So Ed W., relax. I did leave the connection unverified and open to questioning.
'Anti cultist,' another fierce critic, armchair sociologist and hypocrite in my book. Complains on his blog that groups (like Zeitgeist) are in fact a cult yet also clearly states that people band together for survival. Complains that the Zeitgeist forums took another approach while he was fully aware of the endeavors of 'anti-members' out to create chaos, did not focus on that or the fact that it drove some moderators to tears. Complains that the behavior of many Zeitgeist members and supporters leaves much to be desired yet a quick glance over at the CS forums will show you that he spews the most foulest shit himself.

1. foolish, unintelligent, or silly; stupid: It is surprising that supposedly intelligent people can make such asinine statements.
2. of or like an ass: asinine obstinacy; asinine features.

Really? I'm being asinine for pointing out what I perceive to be fallacies? When I see a topic like this one over at the CS forums called 'Jacque Fresco: Deadbeat Dad,' I don't get the impression that you're doing objective (background) research. Seeing such a topic where some folks make some shocking comments give me the impression that it is simply character assassination.
Those folks are way beyond the point of objective analysis. You've reached the point where people (Zeitgeist supporters) view you as a debunking collective and rightly so. I raise the question; 'how did you get there?,' because some people pretend to be some kind of sociologist yet the introspective angle is hardly if not at all present. It's seemingly always easier to blame someone else. . .
But now that the pleasantries are over, I'll see if I can counter some 'main points.' And who knows, maybe I have some demands of my own. Quid pro quo, right?


Muertos said...

CS is not a monolithic entity. The regulars who post there (I'm among them) are very different in their outlook. Personally, I ignore Nanos, I don't even understand what he says half the time. I've also had, and stated several times, problems with how some members of the CS forums dig up and harp on personal details of the lives of ZM members. I also personally don't believe the ZM is a full-blown cult, though I think it's pretty close to the line. (There are non-religious cults. Amway is a prime example).

My problem with the ZM is, and has always been, its outspoken and tenacious advancement of conspiracy theories. That aspect of the ZM got a huge boost just last week with the re-release of a recut of the first Zeitgeist film together with a "study guide" that pushes the same discredited material (pseudohistorian Acharya S., 9/11 Truth tropes, Federal Reserve conspiracies) that Peter Joseph was pushing 3 years ago. I constantly hear "the movies aren't the movement," and then the movement goes and does something like this, doubling down and trying to defend the stuff they claim "isn't relevant." (If it's not relevant, why defend it?) If the ZM would stop pushing conspiracy theories and dissociate itself from conspiracy gurus such as Peter Joseph, I really wouldn't care about it, and I doubt very many others on CS would either.

Ed V. said...

Yes Muertos, I have to be careful not to lump everyone together but it is obvious that a number of (former) disgruntled Zeitgeist members wind up over at the CS forums. It's almost like a meeting place for the highly critical of TZM. I'm sure there are also folks who's focus is not on ZG but on for example Alex Jones or 9/11.

I actually watched Addendum first and later on Zeitgeist 1. Personally, I view that first film as a personal project of Peter Joseph. Even I see some faults with Zeitgeist 1 - hijackers or a plane that weren't there - a group of businessmen behind every war in history. The bashing of Christianity was also not very smart and a guarantee to upset religious folks. It's more entertainment than a documentary, but I believe it was intended to provoke thought.

Realizing that - that parts of Zeitgeist 1 fall into the category of fiction, I don't have that much of a problem with it. Addendum took on an entirely different course although it kept the name and this is a major obstacle for some people. The second movie steers towards the Venus Project and as such departs largely from ZG1.

(More on this later.)

Ed V. said...

I don't know how fruitful your confrontations with conspiracy theories in general and the Zeitgeist movement in particular can be. That's because you take personal offense to the conspiracy theories in ZG1 where I (and others) don't.

People will always talk and assume things based on (limited) information. That's a fact of life. Constantly opposing that is like fighting windmills. You're fully entitled to remind people of facing the facts but doing that at every opportunity - you'll lose the attention of those you address.

Conspiracy theories have a wide base of origin, in my opinion, and can be caused by many factors. Distrust of the government, limited or conflicting data, historical facts, similar scenarios in the past, considering the interests of power groups, policy of governments, etc. Most of all it's sociology. . .

I'm sorry Muertos but I don't have a problem with the conspiracy theories in ZG1, and with Addendum I don't have a problem at all. I simply moved on. Maybe that sound advice for you as well?

Muertos said...

I think it's unfortunate that you're willing to sanction conspiracy theorizing, and the deliberate dissemination of knowingly untrue information in the Zeitgeist films, for the sake of gaining followers to your movement. This is an "ends justify the means" approach that I think doesn't bode well for a movement that purports to be altruistic. I also think you're going to have serious problems attracting any support beyond a loyal base of conspiracy theorists with such an approach.

As for how productive it is to present facts to Zeitgeisters who believe the false information pushed at them in the Zeitgeist films, you're right, most of them are difficult to convince, and even the ones who concede that Peter Joseph pushes demonstrable falsehoods in his movies seem to forgive it because it's "for a good cause." However, Conspiracy Science and its articles exposing the conspiracy theories contained in the Zeitgeist films is now one of the top hits on Google that comes up whenever anyone searches for "Zeitgeist movie" and several other related terms. Also, we regularly hear from people who were on the verge of being convinced by Peter Joseph's conspiracy proselytizing, but who decided not to get involved with the ZM after reading our articles. Those are the people we're trying to reach--not the true believers, whose minds can rarely be changed by anything, but those who might otherwise have been lured in without the true facts having been presented to them. From that standpoint, I believe that what I and others at CS do has been extraordinarily worthwhile and successful.

Ed V. said...

Muertos, I tolerate the CT's in the first film simply because there's a higher purpose here. If I would strongly oppose it like you do, I would effectively throw in my own windows. It's becomes a matter of one or the other, and that's where you are driving at as well. You might think I'm being ambiguous here but all that is for a reason.

I read some of your articles Muertos and I consider you an articulate and smart guy. (I'm not sucking up here.) But you seem to turn a blind eye to certain matters while fixating on others like the CTs in ZG1. I'm going to be a bit graphic here but that's for a purpose.
Imagine you're floating in a sea of shit, you take one turd and you say: "I don't like this turd (Cts), this turd pisses me off."

Take a look around you in the world and notice just how selfish and greedy people are. Yes, people also conspire. It has been proven many times in our history and I consider it a fact in life. You don't have to confront Conspiracy Theories, many have been proven already. You're effectively wasting your energy with this. Know that the world is filled with corruption and once you know that you might consider coming up with improvements. The latter is something I strive for.

And another thing Muertos while CS is not a monolithic entity, it certainly has become a meeting place for the fierce anti TZM critic. Some of those critics actively pursue ways of discrediting TZM and TVP by any means, that includes making videos not based on facts but on supposition (a.k.a. theories). Tread careful since some of those critics are on the threshold (and maybe even went over it already) of creating some conspiracy theories of their own.