vid of alex jones excoriating zeitgeist addendum

Lets do a chip-in to get Alex Jones some psychiatric help.
 
I always thought Alex Jones was really stupid, given his conspiracy theory stuff, but he's proved to me that he has some intelligence. He's right on the mark with his criticism. "Zeitgiest" is collectivist, and it's that philosophy we should fighting against. Michael Nystrom, proprietor of the DailyPaul posted this on his website and promoted it. Nystrom is clearly a socialist trying to corrupt the Ron Paul movement with collectivism and anti-capitalism.
 
66.gif
 
it is impossible for many of you to agree with another person on something unless you agree with that person on everything, and that is why your brand of politics will never be put into practice, just fyi

e: all of you->many of you. it seems that there are yet some reasonable people willing to work with others to achieve mutually beneficial goals.
 
Last edited:
qaxn said:
it is impossible for many of you to agree with another person on something unless you agree with that person on everything, and that is why your brand of politics will never be put into practice, just fyi

e: all of you->many of you. it seems that there are yet some reasonable people willing to work with others to achieve mutually beneficial goals.
Click to expand...


Apparently you don't realize just how Dr. Paul's philosophy is fundamentally in opposition to the philosophy of this film. This film is collectivist. Dr. Paul is individualist. This film is against private ownership of the means of production, i.e. capitalism. Dr. Paul is for it. This film seeks a levelling of society so that no one is able to rise above another in wealth. Dr. Paul supports a society where people are allowed to become wealthier than others and unequal in socioeconomic stature as long as it's done through trade. This film seeks to abolish money. Dr. Paul seeks to bring real money into use. And so on. There is not much, if any common ground. The philosophy of this film is what we're supposed to be fighting against. And you don't have to agree with Ron Paul on everything, but if you believe with the basic philosophy of individualism which is the grounding of his philosophy then this film should be criticized and exposed for the garbage that it is.
 
Last edited:
Ben2008 said:
Apparently you don't realize just how Dr. Paul's philosophy is fundamentally in opposition to the philosophy of this film. This film is collectivist. Dr. Paul is individualist. This film is against private ownership of the means of production, i.e. capitalism. Dr. Paul is for it. This film seeks a levelling of society so that no one is able to rise above another in wealth. Dr. Paul supports a society where people are allowed to become wealthier than others and unequal in socioeconomic stature as long as it's done through trade. This film seeks to abolish money. Dr. Paul seeks to bring real money into use. And so on. There is not much, if any common ground. The philosophy of this film is what we're supposed to be fighting against. And you don't have to agree with Ron Paul on everything, but if you believe with the basic philosophy of individualism which is the grounding of his philosophy then this film should be criticized and exposed for the garbage that it is.
Click to expand...

they recognize the serious problems of the current economic system
they are against state suppression of speech, privacy, due process, etc.

they do not need to be austrian school minarchist objectivist libertarians for them to be helpful allies in those two struggles.
 
Last edited:
qaxn said:
they recognize the serious problems of the current economic system
they are against state suppression of speech, privacy, due process, etc.

they do not need to be austrian school minarchist objectivist libertarians for them to be helpful allies in those two struggles.
Click to expand...


They're totally backwards. They blame private ownership of the means of production, the profit motive, and competition. The problem with our economy is government interference with private ownership, government interference with the profit motive, and government regulation preventing competition. We need MORE private ownership and control and more profit, and more competition. If you don't agree with this, then how can you even associate yourself with Ron Paul?
 
Last edited:
Ben2008 said:
They're totally backwards. They blame private ownership of the means of production, the profit motive, and competition. The problem with our economy iss government interference with private ownership and government interference with the profit motive. We need MORE private ownership and control and more profit, and more competition. If you don't agree with this, then how can you even associate yourself with Ron Paul?
Click to expand...

because pacifist unoppressive capitalists are a marked improvement over warmongering oppressive corporatists. i'm not looking for some crazy grand ideological struggle, i'm looking for a means to qualitatively improve the lives of all people. if you felt the same way, if you're in it because you think minimalist government and capitalism will make things right, and not because mises gives you a hardon, you'd agree.

conza88 said:
Socialism ain't one of them. ;)
Click to expand...
see: popular fronts
 
Last edited:
Ben2008 said:
They're totally backwards.
Click to expand...

They just don't want a state because it is in the way of them working on their utopia... Ron Paul doesn't want interference in our lives either, and neither do they.. so they aren't totally backwards. They could live on their own within a free society.

I haven't seen any proof that they want to force their "totally backwards" philosophy on you or me.. and I'll bet if their society became as successful and abundant as they claim you would want to join it. I know I would, as long as I could leave any time I wanted.


I'm not advocating this portion of the film. I imagine I would probably trade things with people in a free society. I might not value some of the things I trade, and if they are valuable to society then I am essentially using a currency.
 
qaxn said:
see: popular fronts
Click to expand...

See: A Layman's look at the Communist Manifesto


dannno said:
They just don't want a state because it is in the way of them working on their utopia... Ron Paul doesn't want interference in our lives either, and neither do they.. so they aren't totally backwards. They could live on their own within a free society.
Click to expand...

How many times do I have to say this? They want Anarcho-Commune (ism) / Socialism..

The system was practically the first ever social / political system. The Aboriginals had it for 40,000 years... they remained in the dirt & squalor, as nomads... the same with every other tribe out there... Because it contains Communism/Socialism... you know the abolition of all private property, no protection of those rights...

What these retards want to do, is go back to that system... regress back to a system pre-civilization... except use the tools created by civilization!

As soon as they adopt it, they will be leaching off the free market technology gained in every other single system that has it.

Should it choose not to, it will NOT PROGRESS one single step. If the ENTIRE world adopted this system, we, would, all, be, fucked.... No money, no private ownership of the means of production..

I haven't seen any proof that they want to force their "totally backwards" philosophy on you or me.. and I'll bet if their society became as successful and abundant as they claim you would want to join it. I know I would, as long as I could leave any time I wanted.
Click to expand...

Not, gonna, happen. I wish them all the best, and go give it a shot... I just wish they would stfu with their bullshit fantasy propaganda. We don't need to hear this shit. :)

I'm not advocating this portion of the film. I imagine I would probably trade things with people in a free society. I might not value some of the things I trade, and if they are valuable to society then I am essentially using a currency.
Click to expand...

Ok, good then. :) Barter system, yeaaaaah never seen that one before.. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
You're right. Anarcho-communism is precisely what it is. And there is nothing "anarcho" about it, because it's the collective ruling over the individual.
 
Ben2008 said:
You're right. Anarcho-communism is precisely what it is. And there is nothing "anarcho" about it, because it's the collective ruling over the individual.
Click to expand...

:) Indeed, the blind faith supporters don't see that though... they love to espouse "but there is no government, no state, no ruler" - an improvement some what, but it hardly changes the fact - the system contains communism / socialism, and THAT is exactly why the tribes remained in squalor, in a pre-civilized society that would see mankind walking around in the dirt still.... if it had remained as the constant political / social system.

They are practically Malthusians in terms of those who advocate a reduction in the human population; to where the environment is not affected by human civilization.. aka let's regress thousands of years.. :eek:
 
qaxn said:
they recognize the serious problems of the current economic system
they are against state suppression of speech, privacy, due process, etc.

they do not need to be austrian school minarchist objectivist libertarians for them to be helpful allies in those two struggles.
Click to expand...

Thank you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Ender
Alex Jones and the Freedom of Speech
Replies
17
Views
1K
dannno
dannno
PAF
Wall Street’s Takeover of Nature Advances with Launch of New Asset Class
Replies
2
Views
2K
devil21
D
W
A Fraud or a Fighter? Just Who Is Alex Jones? A Review of “Alex’s War”
4 5 6
Replies
109
Views
5K
GlennwaldSnowdenAssanged
G
Occam's Banana
Salon on "right-wing fake history"
Replies
3
Views
974
Anti Globalist
Anti Globalist
S
Alex Jones terminates career of Millie Weaver; treats her exact same way as Brian D. Hill
2
Replies
25
Views
5K
wizardwatson
wizardwatson
Back
Top