Sunday, June 15, 2008

Zeitgeist: Conspiracy or Internet idiocy?

While Zeitgeist is an interesting and unusual film, the ideas it presents should be approached with some caution. Before taking my word for it, visit this site to watch the movie online: » click here to view

Zeitgeist abounds with conspiracy theories and makes a very good case against Christianity (according to the film; there is no record of Jesus as a historical figure; the story is more an astrological metaphor), and it also has a section attacking the central bank of the U.S.: financiers like J.P. Morgan intentionally precipitated the depression by calling in loans on mass for their own advantage, and the central bank continues it’s hegemony by providing the government with currency at interest that can never be repaid.

There is also an expose on 9/11 claiming it was all an inside job, perpetrated by the U.S. government. This really does seem incredibly far fetched; although some very compelling evidence is presented. The buildings collapse in the manner of a controlled demolition where a series of charges cause implosion. Why did the interior steel structure collapse? Why was there practically nothing left of the planes? (Even with particularly bad crashes, there is always substantial wreckage). Why did an adjacent building which wasn’t hit by a plane also collapse? You can even see a series of small explosions down the WTC just before it collapses; makes you think anyway.

The main problem with the ideas Zeitgeist presents is that they lack credible sources. Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeitgeist,_the_Movie Gives some background info, producer etc. The criticism is worth reading:

"In addition to attracting significant public interest, it has been criticized for relying too heavily on anecdotal evidence and for using unidentified, undated, and unsourced video news clips, voice-overs, quotes, and book citations without page numbers. In a piece entitled Internet idiocy: the latest pandemic, the Arizona Daily Wildcat refers to the film as "internet bullshit" saying that "witty sayings, fear tactics and a cool, assertive air all enable them to convince the unwitting public of their points". In one of its few mainstream reviews the Irish Times called it "unhinged" and accused it of offering nothing but "surreal perversions of genuine issues and debates"
Many conspiracy theories seem to omit details that don't support their case while focussing on those that do. Zeitgeist is no exception.

No comments: