File: Zeitgeist..swf-(850 KB, Loop)
[_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)01:26 No.

Marked for deletion (old).
>> [_] sage sage 03/14/13(Thu)01:56 No.

  Zeitgeist is just another word for communism. They are authoritarians who (in this flash) want to
  make it illegal for you to smoke instead of telling you cigs are bad and that you shouldn't smoke
  but allowing you to make up the choice for yourself. In a Zeitgeists society cigs would be banned
  and people who tried to import and smoke them would be sent to jail like marijuana . People need
  more freedom not less.

>> [_] sage sage 03/14/13(Thu)02:02 No.

  Also I like how they think that a computer would be able to determine the proper price of goods
  over a free market. NEWS FLASH free markets use computers to help set the price of goods. Its
  super fucking efficient too.
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjh7mXPfMKs

>> [_] sage sage 03/14/13(Thu)02:19 No.

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Ttbj6LAu0A

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)02:26 No.

  >>1913472

  Zeitgeist You completely missed what the cig example said. There is no choice regarding what is
  healthy for the human body or not, it is a scientific discovery. In a zeitgeist society cigs
  would not be banned, cigs would be REALISED through science if it's healthy for the public to
  consume such a product. Are you going to tell me that scientific thinking is communist? The laws
  of nature are the authority, not a person in a zeitgeist society.

  Also there would be no prices, there would be no trade, or market in a zeitgeist society. It
  would be sharing society, not a trade society. Morals and values or a code of conduct would be
  realised again by science, so there would be an objective method of sharing effectively.

  Zeigeist is not politcal as you imply, these are system approaches to organising society.

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yPmHaTirnCc

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)02:31 No.

  >>1913491
  In a non-Zeitgeist society we have REALISED that cigs are bad for us. Ask anybody are cigs bad
  for you? Non-smokers and Smokers will tell you they are bad for their health. Its not that they
  dont know its bad for them. So i ask you how would zeitgeists deal with cigs in any way different
  than in the current society if not to ban them?

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)02:40 No.

  >>1913495

  Zeitfag here: The general public right now is an uneducated culture, it's a complicated issue as
  to why people smoke if people apparently know that cigs are bad for their health. Yet there is a
  monetary motivation in this trade society to literally profit from making people unhealthy. A
  more critical example is the sale of guns. Where trade advocates trade to seperate that a gun
  salesman isn't doing anything wrong by selling weapons to militaries.

  Deal with cigs? if cigs are known to be unhealthy and it is proven with science then a zeitgeist
  society wouldn't use such a product at all. The same as using other products which can be proven
  to be bad for human health yet are sold in the market. Another example, the scientology belief
  system is sold for a great price, yet in a zeitgeist society if it is proven by science that such
  a belief system is bad for the public it wouldn't be practiced.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)02:41 No.

  >>1913495

  this is what a scientific or "zeitgeist" society would be like, it would respect the laws of
  nature so to gain the most pleasant social experience possible through using science to realise a
  healthy code of conduct for society to follow. It would show cooperation, not market competition
  is actually healthy for humanity.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)02:44 No.

  >>1913500
  So what do you do wit the people that dont care and continue to smoke? What do you do with the
  people that dont fit in with your grand Zeitgeist Society. I'll give you a hint:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_killings_under_Communist_regimes

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)02:56 No.

  >>1913500

  >if cigs are known to be unhealthy and it is proven with science then a zeitgeist society
  wouldn't use such a product at all.

  But people know cigarettes are unhealthy and it's quite proven, so what is different with your
  scenario that would prevent cigarettes being used?

  also I closed the flash at
  >ANYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH ME IS A SOCIOPATH

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)03:00 No.

  >>1913508
  I really think they want to make cigs like illegal like marijuana. We need more freedom not less.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)03:02 No.

  >>1913508

  But people know cigarettes are unhealthy and it's quite proven, so what is different with your
  scenario that would prevent cigarettes being used?

  Zeitfag here: that's a good question, I'll do my best to answer it. In our current trade free
  market society, it is libertrian, where you have the choice to do whatever you want regarding
  what you buy. In a zeitgeist society instead motivations would be shaped towards the most
  healthiest and prosperous circumstance. As the laws of nature are a dictatorship.

  To ask what would prevent cigs being used, we also have to ask what enables cigs to be used now?
  we have the commercial aspect for one where it's good business to sell them, there's also the
  social aspect where it's apparently "social" to smoke.

  So to answer your question, an effort would be made in a zeitgeist social system to analyse
  motivations.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)03:06 No.

  Guys! guys! Tell us again about how you want the world to be ruled by computers! Why wasn't that
  in the movie called Addendum like it was in the flashes with that name? Guys! Guys?

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)03:07 No.

  >>1913504

  zeitfag here: please notice how you're telling me what I'm going to do in the zeitgeist society.
  as in you want it to be a bad thing, you're thinking in a negative way.

  The zeitgeist movement is an educational movement, either the idea that the laws of nature are a
  dictatorship is accepted by the public and so we adapt to them or we continue with the current
  free market system it's that simple. I'm not going to round you up or anything lol.

  Education is the answer. Those who don't want to "fit in" to a society that respects the laws of
  nature would be irrational, religious in thinking. they need help, so they might be rounded up,
  but not exterminated as that method has proven not to work.

>> [_] sage sage 03/14/13(Thu)03:09 No.

  >>1913516

  the goal of a resource based economy which is the scientific method for social concern is not to
  be "ruled be computers", the goal is not to be ruled by subjective political thought, but to be
  ruled by scientific realisations.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)03:16 No.

  >>1913512
  >motivations would be shaped
  That's coercion. It is evil and wrong.
  Coercion locking someone in a box for 10 years because they choose to spend their money on
  marijuana(or cigs) and then at the end of it telling them you did so for their own good.
  I would like to point you to my first post where I said that zeitgeists wanted to make tobacco
  illegal. >>1913472
  You have the belief that society owns each human being. That is wrong. Each and every human being
  owns themselves and so long as they dont bother other people should be allowed to conduct
  destructive practices onto themselves.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)03:23 No.

  >>1913525

  that is so close minded. As soon as I say "education" and "motivations would be shaped", you
  think that the only way human behaviour can be influenced for the public good would be to use
  coercion.

  TL:DR ver: You're putting words in my mouth.

  You're talking as if I do not know that coercion and violence isn't productive or helpful.

  There are extremely rare cases of "prisons" actually being what they're meant to be:

  a correctional institution.

  I'm not talking about a rank hole you stick someone in, more like a well made social experience
  to alter someone's behaviour positively.

  each human being is owned by the laws of nature, I'm not for libertarianism. Humans should act in
  such a way to benefit themselves and others.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)03:25 No.

  >>1913518
  > so they might be rounded up, but not exterminated as that method has proven not to work.

  lol omg why did i have to argue with you for so long to get to the point where you would admit
  you wanted to round people up and kill them?
  >screencapped
  Anyways free markets already use computers you want find any improvements by impingement them.
  You should know that Zeitgeists are analogous to communists. You should know that rounding people
  up and putting them into camps even if you dont kill them for smoking is wrong. I believe very
  few Zeitgeists know 2 shits about the economy and only appeared because of the 2007 crash.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)03:31 No.

  >>1913529
  Smokers already know tobacco causes cancer. There is no more education that can be done. They
  choose to smoke knowing they will eventually get cancer.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)03:34 No.

  >>1913531

  classic zeitgeist critic nonsense.

  I say the opposite of what you think I think, yet you still want to believe that I do not think
  that way.

  If people are damaging society, they of course they might need to rounded up and EDUCATED to
  alter their behaviour so their behaviour would be positive towards society.

  How does the current prison system alter behaviour positively? for the most part it doesn't it
  doesn't know how human behaviour works. Mostly the current prison system doesn't attempt to
  educate people to enrich them at all, it treats people like rubbish.

  Explain yourself, how is rounding people up to alter people's cancerous behaviour into a positive
  framework "wrong" as you put it?

>> [_] f4r !HanakoDlmg 03/14/13(Thu)03:39 No.

  >>1913518
  >an educational movement
  Bullshit. I'm sure churches would love to 'educate' me too. They can get fucked and so can you.

  For the record, smoker, drinker and gambler here. I know that I'll end up dying of lung
  cancer/liver failure/heart attack at a poker table. Do I care? No. Neither do most people. We do
  it because we enjoy it, can afford it, it doesn't hurt anyone else, and fuck you nanny state.

  I obey the speed limit because someone has worked out a safe speed to travel on x road, ignoring
  it might kill me (don't care) and someone else (do care).

  Tl;DR your right to swing your fist ends at my nose.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)03:43 No.

  >>1913542

  Zeitfag here: What people like you completely fail to take into account is social
  inter-connectivity. You want to desperately believe that hurting yourself and being rude and
  insulting doesn't hurt other people. Science has news for you.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)03:45 No.

  >>1913535
  A person has the right to smoke if they so choose to. If they want to kill themselves slowly with
  ciggarettes or alcohol or drugs or ANYTHING else you can think of, they should be permitted to do
  so. I could understand your claims of "education" if you were stating that children should be
  brought up to deal with these things, but you are trying to take away the fundamental rights of
  individuals in an attempt to make your "society" better.

  It doesn't work like that. If you deprive someone of something and give them little reason for
  it, they will resent you and your entire corrupt regime.

  You're neo-communist without anything that might actually work towards improving society.

  You're a cult.

  Go away.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)03:47 No.

  >>1913544
  Because Cigarettes are what's killing society

  Sure

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)03:47 No.

  >>1913544
  You know nothing of anything don't sully the name of science. This whole thread has shown your
  failings because you keep talking

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)03:48 No.

  So Zeitfag

  Do you fap? Pretty important question here

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)03:53 No.

  >>1913545

  zeitfag here: I'm not for libertarianism.

  so just because a person gets older they shouldn't be educated?

  The laws of nature do not respect made up "human rights", there is only what is healthy and what
  isn't. plain and simple.

  the goal of the zeitgeist movement is to deprive people of unhealthy behaviours, products, and
  methods which infest the current zeitgeist.

  Politics, religion, and markets are the biggest criminals of our age yet are praised blindly.

  >>1913547

  what's killing society is trade. Trade/barter is violence yet are respectfully called "good
  business".

  >>1913548

  where's your scientific evidence which proves that there is no such thing as social
  inter-connectivity.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)03:54 No.

  >>1913549

  Yes I fap, I created the meet and fuck driving down the road version. I fap to that.

>> [_] f4r !HanakoDlmg 03/14/13(Thu)03:56 No.

  >>1913544
  I punch someone in the face, blow smoke in their face, force alcohol down their throat, that's
  hurting them.

  >>1913535
  There was something like that before wasn't there? They were camps, where people were made to
  concentrate... yeah that worked out fucking brilliantly didn't it.

  >>1913529
  >each human being is owned by the laws of nature
  Get fucked we are. We're at the top of the food chain. We can and do dominate whatever the fuck
  we want to (although that's not saying we should, look at how the rainforests worked out). What
  you're saying is that we should regress? Like monkeys? Nature can go fuck itself too, I'm quite
  happy where I am thank you very much.

>> [_] f4r !HanakoDlmg 03/14/13(Thu)03:58 No.

  zeitfag, just for you I'm going to chug a bourbon and coke and smoke a cig. OMG LOOK AT HOW MUCH
  I'M HURTING SOCIETY.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)03:59 No.

  >>1913553

  violent talk is destructive in and of itself. new born babies for example hate violent talk.

  you're very arrogant as you don't want to recognise that we are owned by the laws of nature as
  they are understood by science.

  you're at the top of the food chain are you? try walking on the walls, I'm really sure you can
  call the laws of nature your "bitch".

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:01 No.

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E5lhkNUtkBA
  The Message of Freedom in One Minute

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:03 No.

  >>1913551
  What Science and research do you dare to quote, you claim that Trade hurts but all sciences,
  mathematics, and economics proves otherwise.

  Who has done your research to be sure that your reverse functioning digestive system crap that
  you spew will work?

  Prisons were designed as a place of rehabilitation when they failed to do as we expected we just
  started using them as places to stick people we didn't want to deal with (sound familiar?)

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:03 No.

  >>1913551
  No shit.

  So what you're saying is that we should go back to living in grass fucking huts and pillaging
  everything.

  Plenty of human things don't follow the Laws of Nature. Morality being the biggest proponent
  there. The reason we are human is because we told the laws of nature to go fuck themselves.

  When Nature told us to stay inside at night, we made fire.

  When Nature told us not to hunt things we couldn't kill with our hands, we made spears and bows.

  When Nature told us that we should die to diseases, we made vaccines.

  Fuck you. You don't know WHAT you want. You proclaim this insane rhetoric of "The Laws of Nature"
  and yet proclaim science to be your lynchpin, at the same time decrying Politics, Religion, and
  the free market for being anti-society when in fact they are the only reason Science has been
  able to reach this point in history.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:04 No.

  >>1913557

  if you watch the scientology introduction video it actually claims the same thing:

  human beings have rights blah blah blah.

  News flash: humanity has no rights, human beings are OWNED by the laws of nature.

  "the awesome machinery of nature" -carl sagan.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:04 No.

  >>1913555
  Give us fifty years, we'll make anti-grav boots.

  We call the laws of nature our bitch NOW thanks to Science. Now you're trying to take Science
  away from us and put it back in that cunt's hands? Fuck off.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:07 No.

  >>1913560
  >Human beings are OWNED by the laws of nature

  You keep saying that and it's so ridiculously untrue that it's like you're purposely trying to
  make your movement look retarded.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:09 No.

  >>1913559

  zeitfag here:

  that's comical, I'm not saying humanity should go back into living in grass fucking huts.

  I'm saying it should recognise the technological progress happens through cooperation not market
  competition.

  Are you going to tell me that for profit software is more powerful than open source?

  you can't tell the laws of nature to go fuck themselves.

  that's like saying you can stop eating and live, or walk on the walls. totally insane.

  we did not make fire, WE DISCOVERD FIRE, which is different.

  I think you are misunderstanding me when I use the term "the laws of nature".

  The reason science progresses is because of cooperation,

  Science does not progress through destructive purposes like creating war machines and devices,
  that's a society that's flushing it's progress down the toilet.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:09 No.

  >>1913560
  That is the message of liberty. Its is a libertarian message. Throwing people in camps becuase
  they refuse to stop smoking is the Zeitgeist message. The two messages are opposite.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:14 No.

  >>1913566

  the message of liberty is always the freedom to be destructive, which is what zeitgeist is
  against. You want to simply zeitgeist's argument because it disrupts your worldview.

  I'm proud to be against liberty.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:14 No.

  >>1913564
  Except that's wrong. Some of the greatest scientific discoveries have been born from the fruits
  of war. Many of our life saving medical processes have been created to deal with injuries caused
  by war. Nuclear energy provides a clean and nearly risk-free source of abundant energy because we
  decided to blow up two cities.

  We have methods of creating fire. Because of that, we made it. No other species uses fire. Sure,
  we didn't "create" it, but we create the tools that allow us to utilize and spark it.

  Stop eating? Maybe that's mad. But your "Walk on walls" argument is stupid because you've
  obviously never bothered to look into the kind of technology that might allow us to do so.

  And yes, for profit software is more powerful then open source. Only a fucking retard would think
  otherwise. EA sells more copies of ONE game then Hydorah will ever get downloads of, as much of a
  shame that is.

>> [_] f4r !HanakoDlmg 03/14/13(Thu)04:17 No.

  >>1913555
  >violent talk is destructive
  Do you not grasp the concept of an illustration?

  Also, I chugged my bourbon and coke and had my smoke. Both were quite enjoyable. I'm quite
  confident I didn't make anyone else take up smoking or drinking though.

  If society wants to change, it will. If you want to change all of society, it won't happen.
  Forced meme creator would be proud of your efforts though.

  Why can't you just start a cult camp and cut off communication with the outside world. You'll be
  nice and safe from all those destructive influences out there. You can live with your commie
  robots and believe whatever the fuck you want, and most importantly you can stop shitting up /f/.

  Out of interest, are you the same guy who was posting the chunks of the zeitgeist movie?

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:17 No.

  >>1913564
  You speak that progress is made through cooperation though you use a resource right at this very
  moment designed for military implications brought on by military competition and released to the
  public after the fact that it has commercial use. If your mind is drawing a blank here is a tip.
  It starts with an "I" and and ends in "net"

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:19 No.

  >>1913570

  zeitfag here:

  Nuclear energy: one word: chernobyl

  the "fruits" of war? so shell shock doesn't damage people anymore...

  again, it's not creating fire, It's DISCOVERING fire.

  you're obviously trying to ignore my metaphor. Everyday people cannot simply walk on the walls as
  the law of gravity will not allow it. having anti-gravity boots does not change the laws of
  nature.

  here we have the ignorance coming into view:

  "for profit software is more powerful then open source."

  Wow, that's such a crazy statement and it's religiously defended with an ad hominem too.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:23 No.

  >>1913572

  zeitfag here: the internet is actually very anti-commercial with the religion of intellectual
  property failing to keep a lid on the ABUNDANT amount of media that pours through it. the market
  is based on scarcity, so the internet is anti-market by it's nature.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:23 No.

  Spamming of Zeitgeits flashes is political propaganda and should be b&.
  If the spammer/s would keep it to posting them once in a while people wouldn't hate their shit so
  much and they would get their message across way better, but like this they look even worse than
  any other political party.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:23 No.

  >>1913569
  Then go ahead and throw people in jail for using tobacco.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:25 No.

  >>1913573
  The laws of nature are not some big blanket object it is the law that governs survival you
  cockbite.

  The strongest survive (Intelligence is a strength)

  Our ability and our very survival has been based on that Competition with other creatures and
  other humans in a lot of cases has lead us to our advancements that is nature that is the law
  that governs us all cooperation was always between those of similar likeness for the goal of out
  doing others

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:26 No.

  >>1913573
  Who said anything about changing them? We don't need to change them to render them obsolete.

  I never said that War didn't hurt people. It's pretty fucked up, in fact. Shell Shock, PTSD,
  death tolls, all proof of war's bad side. But you're so locked into seeing only the negative that
  you're completely ignoring that mankind's greatest inventions were created at first to fuck over
  man.

  You ignored my point on fire, faggot.

  Nuclear energy: Three words: Three Mile Island. A similar accident happened there and was
  contained with no civilian casualties. The power plant is STILL IN OPERATION TODAY.
  Congratulations, Chernobyl had fucking morons with no idea what the words "safety regulations"
  meant.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:26 No.

  >>1913571

  posting the chunks of the zeitgeist movie? Yes.

  zeitgeist isn't about cutting itself off from society as it is not a cult, it's here to stay
  right here in the public. Would you rather it become a cult because you don't like what zeitgeist
  has to say?

  I don't think you grasp the concept of objective understandings, you want everything to be
  subjective instead which is religious. the religion which is known as the status quo.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:27 No.

  >>1913574
  And yet you pay for internet unless your 12 and and your parents pay for it for you. And if you
  think your not paying for it think again if your in college and in a dorm and the wireless is
  free to you its part of the bill you pay to stay there

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:28 No.

  I thought these were banned.

  Good job, mods?

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:28 No.

  While I like Zeitgeist's methods of running a society and economy based on lack of scarcity
  through proper allocation of resources, I find the philosophy that they it bases it's
  governmental/societal structure on to be extremely hypocritical.

  In this thread you've claimed that people who use tobacco cigarettes would be held against their
  will and educated. You've defended the ethics of this proposed action by claiming that the living
  conditions will be acceptable and that focus will be placed on education and reformation in a
  humane manner.

  The problem is not the techniques employed in mass imprisonment, it's the fact that you would
  take away something you have no claim to because someone is committing an action that does not
  effect you.

  1/7

>> [_] f4r !HanakoDlmg 03/14/13(Thu)04:29 No.

  >>1913573
  >Chernobyl
  Yeah, one reactor poorly designed from the outset and was run like shit = every reactor ever.

  >having anti-gravity boots does not change the laws of nature
  But it does. You're saying "X cannot happen" (walking on walls). But these hypothetical boots
  would allow X to happen, thereby invalidating the claim "X cannot happen". Ergo, that law of
  nature would be broken. Just like the many others have done and will continue to.

  We are bound by the laws of physics and space-time (aka SCIENCE, BITCH). I can't go faster than
  the speed of light. I could live the rest of my life without eating, though. Just do the same as
  they to to coma patients, hook me into an IV. That's science.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:29 No.

  >>1913582

  While humans are the most effective in societies, we are each individuals with our own wants,
  needs and desires. We've become attached to societies because we can enact some form of law or
  agreed upon code much more effectively as a group than as individuals, resulting in proper debate
  and reasoning instead of a "might makes right" method of acquiring of resources. Put simply,
  societies exist to benefit the individual, not the other way around.

  While there is a point to be made in stating that someone causing harm to themself might also
  cause harm to another, there is no effective way to prevent them from engaging in this behavior
  without committing an even greater infringement of rights.

  2/7

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:30 No.

  >>1913585

  For example: John smokes a pack a day. He lives alone or with consenting adults and doesn't smoke
  in enclosed public spaces, so no harm is being done to anyone besides John and others who are
  aware of the risks of living with John and deem them acceptable. His friends and family hate to
  see him smoke and pressure him to stop, but John decides to smoke anyhow for reasons known only
  to him.

  John is causing stress to his friends and family with his habit, and he is indeed performing a
  small amount of harm to them. Maybe through peer pressure they will get him to stop, maybe not.

  4/7

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:31 No.

  >>1913586

  Your proposed solution to this is to (however comfortably) incarcerate John, performing a major
  act of harm unto him (depriving him of his basic right of self determination). He is no longer in
  control of his life, but you excuse this by claiming that it's in his best interest.

  The problem is that this is completely hypocritical due to the fact that while John may indeed
  become more healthy because of his state's actions, his quality of life is less. He cannot
  partake in an action he enjoys, and that does far more harm to him than him smoking.

  5/7

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:31 No.

  >>1913577

  zeitgeist advocates the scientific method for social concern, how is that political?

  the cons of war far outweigh the pros.

  Nuclear energy is far more dirty and risky than solar, tidal, wave and geothermal.

  competition with other creates? what with the trees and the plankton that provide oxygen?

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:32 No.

  >>1913573
  You also ignored my example of how open source is less powerful then for profit software, but
  here, let me put it for you this way:

  If your dumb little Zeitgeist movement had a shitload of hired people in the media, it might get
  more exposure. If it had the money for ads it could run them on television and blanket the
  airwaves with their retarded message. People would see it often and go "well if they keep getting
  it on the air it's got to be SOMETHING right" and go with it. You would then shower them in your
  psuedo intellectual bullshit about the laws of nature and society to make them feel enlightened
  and intelligent. Meanwhile your ads would still be running.

  Instead you're a bunch of fucking faggots screaming online, and therefore no one gives a shit.

  Enjoy obscurity.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:32 No.

  >>1913587

  While the harm that the stress was doing to his friends and family is removed completely, his
  associates were voluntarily choosing to interact with him in the first place. If they decided
  that Knowing John was worth the risk of Known John Smokes, they accepted the fact that it would
  cause some stress in their lives. Family can disown him, friends can remove themselves from his
  company; continuing to engage with him was consenting to whatever stress may have been caused by
  the fact that John smoked in the first place. They found the trade of his company to be worth the
  cost of not approving of his actions.

  While science is a fantastic tool for determining models and predicting results, it is a terrible
  tool for making value judgements or relating to the human condition. Science gives us the facts,
  it's up to us to decide what to do with them.

  6/8 (Man this is a long one.)

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:33 No.

  >>1913591

  And that's not even getting into the possibility for extreme corruption. Having worked in
  academia, I can tell you that modern science is not as simple as running a few experiments and
  determining a result. Petty politics surround everything we do, including what results are
  considered valuable and who is considered a credible source. Making policy based on modern
  results found by humans would be absolutely nightmarish considering that many scientific minds
  become attached on an idea because they thought of it or because it seems more elegant.

  In short, this government would be ineffective, easily corruptible and (most importantly)
  unsustainable without extreme measures that come straight from dystopia novels and are not
  remotely ethical. It fails on every point.

  7/8

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:34 No.

  >>1913592

  While the current systems of government are doing poorly, this would be a step in the wrong
  direction. It's actually fairly saddening, because so many other things that Zeitgeist proposes
  would be remarkably beneficial. Their form of government is not one of these things.

  8/8

  tl;dr: ur gay and ur shits all retarded

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:37 No.

  >>1913588
  You apparently don't know how to read because it says creatures (AKA the food chain) and has
  nothing to do with our ability to breath oxygen. If you argument is why there are trees and
  plants it is because they through evolution (advancements) have adopted a reproductive strategy
  that allows them to continue to prosper under normal conditions in nature

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:37 No.

  >>1913584

  it changes how we understand the laws of nautre, but the laws of nature still don't change no
  matter what humanity does.

  you're confusing needs and wants, typical of a market advocate. There are only human needs, human
  wants are irrational.

  I'm not for democracy. the laws of nature cannot be debated, there can only be understood by
  research. (aka SCIENCE, BITCH).

  the way to prevent a human from engaging in damaging behaviour is through education, "human
  rights" is a part of scientology's religion as they want the freedom to be destructive.

  it should be in someone's best interest to love themselves and other people. that is what I
  believe as a zeitfag.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:41 No.

  >>1913598
  I will say this for you ONE more time.
  The law of nature is "The strong will survive" that is all that there is to nature the other crap
  that you claim the law"s" of nature are is nonsensical garbage what your should be referring to
  is evolution which is our ability to adapt to new situations through intelligence or structural
  changes to our being over the course of history

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:42 No.

  >>1913598
  Food should be bland and tasteless, a nutrient-rich paste.

  The only liquid should be water. Distilled and free of anything that could give it flavor.

  Houses should only have walls, floors, a roof, and climate conditioning. Perhaps a bed, but it is
  not permitted to be comfortable.

  Yes, human wants are irrational but it's what prevents us from being fucking emotionless robots.
  Your concept of Zeitgeist completely abolishes any proliferation of culture.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:43 No.

  >>1913602

  The laws of nature are actually unbiased, the idea of "The strong will survive" is a biased,
  cultural view which you are putting on nature because that's what you want to observe.

  the cooperative elements of nature you will want to ignore.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:45 No.

  >>1913605
  And through the courses of life and extinction through the true law of nature that the strong
  will survive are a myth to you then

>> [_] f4r !HanakoDlmg 03/14/13(Thu)04:45 No.

  >>1913605
  Put a lion and a gazelle in a cage, I'm sure they'll cooperate real well.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:45 No.

  >>1913603

  zietfag here: you have a very un-colourful view of human needs if that's what you think that's
  what science has proven what a person needs to be healthy happy and then desire to interact with
  society productivly.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:48 No.

  >>1913607

  you want strength to be violence and competiton which is advocating tyranny which you ironically
  say you're against.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:48 No.

  >>1913609
  You just said that human wants are irrational. Alright, then. I removed any human wants from the
  equation. Now your saying that culture can be included in human needs rather then human wants?
  The only reason that Science has been able to THRIVE is because we have fulfilled our basic needs
  and therefore wish to fulfill our wants. It's the reason civilization exists. If we just wanted
  to fulfill our needs then we would have stopped progressing a loooong time ago.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:48 No.

  >>1913605
  You've gone and ignored all the important parts of my previous posts that involved the use of
  cooperation.
  The ability to cooperate is a strength. Example Bees in general and their relationship with
  flowers has lead them to have the continued strength to survive.

  If you don't get that one I should let you know that if you don't understand how cooperative a
  hive a bees are and their relationship with flowers then you should go back to preschool

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:49 No.

  If a zeitgeist society would become a reality It must be done slowly. You can't force social
  evolution as much as you can't force biological evolution. Things progress over time.

  On the cigarette example: I'd HOPE that people would have a freedom of choice and thought in a
  Zeitgeist society, but the cigarette industry wouldn't be there anymore. So in order for you to
  smoke you would have to make your own cigarettes or marijuana.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:50 No.

  There are laws of the physics. These cannot be contested.

  Gravity will pull you down is a good one. No matter what you do, the force of gravity will always
  pull you towards it's source. Always. There is no known or theoretical way around this.

  However, by manipulating air pressure, we've been able to overpower gravity through powered
  flight. While gravity continues to pull us down, we can resist it for long enough to be effective.

  There is no such thing as a law of nature, as nature is inherently lawless. There are laws of
  physics, which is what you seem to be referring to. There are also natural tenancies, which are
  not universal (Gravity makes you stick to the floor, people cannot walk on walls, fish cannot
  breathe air and so on) and that we can change through ingenuity.

  Please stop confusing the two.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:53 No.

  >>1913612
  And I will add to that that their cooperation is willingly done not forced upon by the flowers or
  the bees

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:54 No.

  >>1913617
  Because Bees are not sentient creatures. They do not possess free will or intelligent thought.

  You are trying to turn people in mindless bees.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:57 No.

  >>1913611

  people starve to death daily outside of your country, that's not fulfilling needs.

  >>1913612

  Yes bees are a good example of cooperation in nature. Yet humanity should respect all these
  natural systems that maintain life. typically when people say "survival of the fittest" they mean
  through violence and competition, not bees in cooperation. that's an implication I went with
  incorrectly.

  >>1913616

  laws of nature:
  Physical laws are typically conclusions based on repeated scientific experiments and observations
  over many years and which have become accepted universally within the scientific community.

  if nature was "lawless" then life wouldn't exist as the same requirements or the same framework
  is used in life design for an organism to work.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:59 No.

  >>1913619
  I'm not the zeitgeist fag I'm the guy trying to prove that he's wrong and that the the only law
  to nature is "The strong will survive"

  Strength being, (Our intelligence, Our physical capabilities and only willing cooperation not
  forced upon by others)

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)04:59 No.

  >>1913617
  zeitfag here:
  when you say free will, you are alluding to the freedom to be destructive. Like cancer.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)05:02 No.

  >>1913622
  People starve to death INSIDE my country, too. What you're proposing seems to be a one-world
  government where everything would be happy and cheery and no one would ever fight each other and
  send their own hard-earned goods off to people they will never see and never interact with.

  You're illogical.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)05:02 No.

  >>1913561
  anti-grav shoes. So the shoes will disprove the force of gravity? In a larger scale, if you can
  go against the grain you disprove the fundamental?

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)05:03 No.

  There seems to be a divide in understanding, here. Allow me to attempt clarification. Please know
  that these are not my own views, only an interpretation of what I understand to be going on here.

  Zeitfag says: We can improve society by forcefully educating it's members scientific fact. By
  causing them to understand these facts, they will see the err of their ways and understand that
  our philosophy is what's best for them.

  Anti-Zeitfags say: We understand what we want, what will make us fulfilled and what's best for
  us. While we accept that other people may wish to live their lives in other ways, we insist that
  no other or others infringe upon how we choose to live (provided that it causes minimal harm to
  anyone else). Any attempt to enforce how you would want to live upon us is not doing us a
  service, and we would act in self defense if you attempted to coerce us into a lifestyle we did
  not agree to.

  Am I wrong? Please clarify if I am.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)05:04 No.

  >>1913626

  Zeitfag here: in a cooperative society based on science, and automation of labour, or effectively
  shared labour how can something be so "hard-earned"?

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)05:05 No.

  >>1913624
  You continue to say the freedom to be destructive. Most people would call it the freedom to enjoy
  their lives. What is destructive to you could be the only reason some people are still alive. It
  is the freedom to choose if you wish to smoke a pack a day or go on a jog. It's what gives me the
  ability to call you a goddamned retard. The fact that you want to take that away is why we're
  disagreeing with you.

  You're trying to take away freedom in general, not just the freedom to be destructive.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)05:07 No.

  >>1913628

  zeitfag: forcefully? the zeitgeist movement is an educational movement not a cult. we're not
  going to force you to obey science and the laws of nature. Yet we must obey what science tells us
  about reality if humanity wishes to survive. I'm sick of the church getting run-time on tv, for
  fucks sake.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)05:07 No.

  >>1913570
  Yes wars have pushed us, but how. The war itself is not a productive system. The people who work
  "against" the war make the innovations and progress. ie medicine ect. War makes us better only by
  giving the people the realisation, that war is insanity. Then comes a new generation that hasn't
  lived the war and make the same mistakes. People are shit like that...

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)05:08 No.

  >>1913630
  Ok, wait, wait, wait.

  You want us to stop all labor?

  Do you really think we're going to fucking progress at ALL if we don't have problems to deal with?

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)05:09 No.

  >>1913628
  Pretty much. With the Zeitfags of course saying that nothing would be forced despite saying that
  any negative behavior would be re-educated in a facility elsewhere.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)05:09 No.

  >>1913632

  that's because freedom is a delusion in a scientific reality.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)05:10 No.

  >>1913639
  Ok, dude. If you want to use your freedom of speech to say that no one should have freedoms, you
  go nuts.

  I'm out.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)05:11 No.

  >>1913624
  The right to be destructive to ones self is and should be freely given and should not be forced
  by your "Concentration camps" to change the destruction to others however is different as is why
  there are laws against murder, arson, and assault you've been here for hours and refuse to learn
  how humans work.

  Here's another example of competition for you that can never be undone no matter how much
  education you give because it is human nature.

  Jealousy, it can also be seen as the inherit need to compete in nature.

  Ever wanted that cute girl that just wasn't into you but showed interest in other guys? But
  thought maybe you could impress her somehow? ( It is internal need to want the best for your
  procreation) failure in your endeavors leads to anger, hatred, and more jealousy

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)05:11 No.

  >>1913638

  you can rest easy, we don't live in the social system zeitgeist advocates. However we will need
  to one day if we live in a reality that is best understood by science.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)05:13 No.

  >>1913633

  Okay, so what say something like this situation occurs. People either refuse to listen to your
  points or have arrived at a philosophical impasse with you over core values.

  What then?

  Do you detain them until they have been educated?

  Do you use force to detain them if they forcefully resist?

  Not everyone is going to agree with your point. Some people place liberty above life in
  importance, and vice versa.

  How do you get people who do not agree with you on these basic points to accept the rule of your
  society? Traditionally it has been with violence, which is where my false assumption came from.

  What alternative do you propose?

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)05:14 No.

  >>1913641

  zeitfag: Jealousy is created by property, not by a "human nature". girls are property in this
  social system.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)05:17 No.

  You are all wrong! Me too! Prove me wrong!

  It's funny how this discussion brings about so much rage. I'm just trying to get the point of all
  sides, but everyone seems to be failing. :)

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)05:18 No.

  >>1913646
  Property is caused by the basic need to impress others for procreative neeeds by showing that you
  have the means to provide well and better than others

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)05:18 No.

  >>1913646

  Actually, it's a pretty natural response for humans.

  Psychiatry and Sociology back me up on this one. Science, in short, backs me up on this one.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)05:19 No.

  >>1913645

  I can't argue for cancerous thinking. I could say the same question yet slightly differently:

  "Some people place GOD above life in importance."

  such a crazy statement can't be responded to seriously how can it?

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)05:20 No.

  >>1913649
  Its also natural response among animals

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)05:22 No.

  >>1913649

  Science doesn't promote survival, science promotes understandings. It might be biased, but I
  think the zeitgeist society I advocate should focus it's science on survival, not pointless
  property, pointless war, pointless political debate.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)05:25 No.

  >>1913650

  You're absolutely right, some people place their god above everything else.

  I personally don't agree with them, but I respect their decision to spend their spare time in
  prayer because it has no negative impact on me.

  Now, if someone were about to bomb my home because of their religion, I wouldn't pause for a
  moment in stopping them with violence if it we necessary.

  That is how my philosophy deals with people who do not agree with me. Let them do as they will,
  unless unreasonable harm will come to someone who does not consent because of it.

  But you never answered my question. People do not agree with you. People refuse to accept your
  way of thinking, in spite of your best efforts. This isn't theoretical, this is a fact that this
  thread has demonstrated.

  Your society will not function with these people refusing to cooperate. How would your movement
  deal with them?

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)05:26 No.

  >>1913652
  Science has always focused on increasing the ease of survival, others may want to kill you
  because you just happen to be standing somewhere when they found that spot and want it. War isn't
  pointless to those on the defensive should they just give in and die because they don't want to
  live up to the competition?

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)05:26 No.

  By obsessing over Zeigeist, its followers have done us all the favor of leaving the public
  discussion to everyone who is actually "serious."

>> [_] f4r !HanakoDlmg 03/14/13(Thu)05:30 No.

  Guys, guys. He's already admitted he was the same asshole spamming /f/ with the zeitgeist movie (>
  >1913579)(permabanned for it). Just email moot.

  >>1913653
  He's also chosen to ignore quite a few other things in this thread too.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)05:31 No.

  >>1913653

  I can't respect your passive attitude to enable religion as religion is violence, a covert war on
  society.

  also as heated as it is, violence only produces more violence, it's not problem solving.

  Look up Peter Popoff's miracle spring water, I hate religion.

  My movement isn't going to "deal" with you. If we gain a cooperative society with enough people
  joining the zeitgeist movement to put pressure on the religious organisations that promote
  damaging practices such as market competition and politics then we do.

  if not enough people join zeitgeist, then we suffer as humanity will have failed to align to the
  laws of nature properly.

  right now the waste machine known as the market is destroying our planet through stubborn
  outdated methods and thought processes.

  I'm not going to do anything to you. this is a flash movie, not the FBI party van.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)05:34 No.

  >>1913658
  >failed to align with the laws of nature properly.

  The fact that we are alive means that we are perfectly aligned with the laws of nature as it is
  with its governing principles

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)05:35 No.

  >>1913657

  zeitfag here: I'm behind proxies.

  and jesus christ, everyone in this thread except me is anti-zeitgeist. can you really expect me
  to keep up?

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)05:39 No.

  >>1913659

  I doubt you're taking the full picture into account. Say polluting the air, using outdated
  technology to produce food, insulting technology by making things to break for monetary profit,
  are examples of refusing to align to nature properly.

>> [_] f4r !HanakoDlmg 03/14/13(Thu)05:39 No.

  >>1913658
  You keep implying that anyone anti-zeitgeist is pro-religion. You're wrong, it's a law of nature.
  Disprove me.
  >>1913660
  >everyone in this thread except me is anti-zeitgeist
  Doesn't take a genius to work out that maybe you're not welcome here. Again, forced meme creator
  would be proud.

  >behind proxies
  Ban evading, too. Nice. Or are you just of the opinion that the 'laws of nature' allow you to do
  whatever the fuck you want.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)05:42 No.

  >>1913660
  People are only responding as you do if you took time to slow down read all the info link to the
  post related to them properly before spam posting over and over and over again causing others to
  retort in large numbers till your overwhelmed.

  And since you realize your the only one here for you maybe you should get the fuck out of here.

  Also your proxy doesn't make you safe from bans

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)05:45 No.

  >>1913663

  I've yet to come across someone who's pro-zeitgeist and pro-religion, therefore I doubt they
  exist.

  I'm glad "forced meme creator" would be proud.

  also you don't take the possibility of your own ignorance. If you actually observed the thread on
  /q/ about zeitgeist, no evidence was provided that zeitgeist is spam. NONE.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)05:51 No.

  >>1913662
  Technology only advances so fast we produce new technology every day and are slowly being
  implemented without your zeitgeist movement through the means of market competition.

  The pollution of the next generation of technology is always reducing and will replace old
  technology at its earliest convenience. Sooner or later it will cause a reversal of pollutants
  given enough time.

  Everything wears down eventually and breaks its how new technology finds its chance to take its
  place and the profit motive to supply the newer cleaner and possibly longer lasting tech keeps
  the whole thing going.

  We are aligned with nature fine

>> [_] f4r !HanakoDlmg 03/14/13(Thu)05:52 No.

  >>1913665
  Bullshit. It's no different to boner pills. Unwanted, unwelcome, and it sure as fuck won't go
  away.

  And you're happy to be like forced meme creator? Shoveling shit? Do you even 4chan?

  >someone who's pro-zeitgeist and pro-religion
  Now this I can agree on. It would be a fair assumption that anyone pro-zeitgeist is
  anti-religion. But just because I'm anti-zeitgeist, doesn't mean I'm pro-religion. Quite the
  opposite.

  TL;DR you're wrong faggot. It's a law of nature.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)05:53 No.

  holy autism batman!
  this thread has been overrun!

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)05:54 No.

  >114 replies,and no porn nor hentai
  i havnt visited /f/ lately

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)05:54 No.

  >>1913667

  copyright holds technology and social progress back.

  pollution is good for business, get sick from fumes? go pay for a doctor's visit.

  the profit motive supplys human wants which are insane, it does not provide needs.

  Unless that fat rich guy needs a gold plated toilet seat.

  we aren't aligned with nature.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)05:56 No.

  >>1913670
  I've come to draw fun from poking holes in this zeitfag so the burst in this thread might mean
  i'm partly to blame for the bloat

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)05:57 No.

  >>1913668
  you can scream zeitgeist is spam all day, the fact is no hardcore argument was ever made in /q/
  about banning me from /f/ I was religious banned for submitting zeitgeist content.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)06:01 No.

  >>1913671
  Copyright hold reward to those responsible for the creation/advancement allowing them to reap
  what they sow.

  They will feel the need to reap what they sow because it is natural to do so. because it goes
  back the way we go about our procreation I meantioned back here (>>1913641
  ) and here (>>1913648
  )

  Without reward nothing neither human or animal would do anything

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)06:02 No.

  >>1913674

  I remember the exact quote MOOT didn't ask how zeitgeist is spam, he just said "email me when he
  does it next" which is close minded as it can get.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)06:02 No.

  Serious Marxist communist here, 20 years in the movement, 35 years old.

  Zeitgeist sound crazy to us too guys. We had the robot debate around 1950 or so. (Pro-tip: the
  robots do nothing).

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)06:04 No.

  >>1913676

  people find creating rewarding, not creation for reward. that's basic human behaviour that you
  don't understand.

>> [_] f4r !HanakoDlmg 03/14/13(Thu)06:05 No.

  >>1913674
  Go read the rules fuckhead. You've violated;
  Global rules 2 (probably), 6, 9, 10, 11, 14, and I want to say 17 too but that's not really a
  rule. Also /f/ rules 1 and 3.

  Yeah, not spam at all.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)06:08 No.

  >>1913680
  No, You don't understand.

  Human behavior has and always will be as with any animal be for the betterment of itself and its
  ability to procreate, life is selfish.

  Unless we evolve into another form with no death or need to procreate we will and always will be
  selfish at our core functions

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)06:08 No.

  >>1913683
  zeitfag:
  calling something spam doesn't make it spam. No evidence has been provided as to how zeitgeist is
  spam. Moot wanted zeitgeist to be spam because people were complaining about zeitgeist so he just
  banned me. no evidence was provided in the thread on /q/ and mood didn't ask for any. You don't
  think that's religious and not an injustice?

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)06:11 No.

  tl;dr : This thread is dog dicks. FREEEDOOMMMMM!

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)06:11 No.

  >>1913684

  sounds like you advocate hitler's selfishness with your attitude.

  There's no evidence to suggest that a human being is born selfish as in a "hitler baby" or a baby
  which is born influenced by satan.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)06:13 No.

  >>1913687
  Selfless attitudes serve as another way to impress others as a basic need for reward which falls
  back to procreation

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)06:13 No.

  zeitfag:

  anyway if you think zeitgeist is a cult or something after these talks with you or evil or
  whatever, then I encourage you to tell people that zeitgeist is evil.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)06:14 No.

  >>1913687
  Also on top of that babies scream "MINE" and tell others "NO" as soon as they are able to talk

>> [_] f4r !HanakoDlmg 03/14/13(Thu)06:18 No.

  >>1913685
  OK you're officially deluded as fuck. You've sad that yu're the only one in this thread who's
  pro-zeitgeist. Pretty much everyone else is telling you to fuck off. You're just repeating "why
  why why". Again, see global rule 17, here I'll even quote it for you:
  >Remember: The use of 4chan is a privilege, not a right. The 4chan staff reserves the right to
  revoke access and remove content for any reason without notice.
  >remove content for any reason
  >any reason
  >ANY
  You may not consider your constant shitposting 'spam', but that doesn't matter anyway. Moot has
  every right to ban you because his nose itches, let alone if a whole board constantly and totally
  rejects something. I'm under those same rules too, just like everyone else here.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)06:24 No.

  Apparently mootles didn't ban you for long enough

>> [_] f4r !HanakoDlmg 03/14/13(Thu)06:28 No.

  >>1913694
  It's a permaban. He's evading via proxies. Shit, we may as well just start flooding the board
  again whenever he posts.

>> [_] Anonymous 03/14/13(Thu)06:52 No.

  Question. Why /f/? Nobody here cares about your stupid propaganda. Go away.