File: zeitgeist.moving.forward036.swf-(7.37 MB, Loop)
[_] Anonymous 04/18/13(Thu)04:57 No.1946912
>> [_] Anonymous 04/18/13(Thu)04:58 No.1946913
moot please help
>> [_] Anonymous 04/18/13(Thu)06:08 No.1946935
I went to watch your movie and it's almost three fucking hours long. How does anybody expect to
hold an audience for that long? Especially in a place like /f/, where people are used to instant
gratification from their flashes? Just because 4chan in anarchistic and anti-societal in theory
doesn't mean that they're going to jump on your cause, there are more than one factor involved in
peoples influences. Also:
>>1946913
HAHAHAHA.
>> [_] zeitgeist 04/18/13(Thu)06:11 No.1946937
>>1946935
People saying "too long didn't read" isn't an actual argument against zeitgeist.
>>1946913
and censorship isn't an argument against either.
>> [_] Anonymous 04/18/13(Thu)06:36 No.1946951
>>1946937
tl;dr is a good reason for ignoring everything you do though
How does it feel to waste all your time on shit nobody cares about except to talk about how
shitty it is?
>> [_] zeitgeist 04/18/13(Thu)06:43 No.1946956
>>1946951
censorship, tl;dr, labelling or mindless slander (shit, communist, cult, theosophy), are not
actual arguments against zeitgeist.
they avoid the debate like religious people screaming blasphemy.
>> [_] Anonymous 04/18/13(Thu)06:45 No.1946957
>>1946937
seeing your posts here for a while, I wouldn't be surprised at all if your actual intention was
to spread animosity towards zeitgeists. It's actually clever (though obnoxious). But the end
result for 4chan will be to get angry over the near mention of zeitgeist in an Pavlovian sort of
way.
It's always slightly sad to see an ideal with good intentions destroyed, but it's good to be
reminded of how the world works, so keep doing what you're doing, sir.
>> [_] zeitgeist 04/18/13(Thu)06:50 No.1946962
>>1946957
thanks anonymous for those words, I appreciate them. I'll keep doing whatever I'm doing, sir.
>> [_] Anonymous 04/18/13(Thu)06:59 No.1946972
>>1946956
Okay, I'll bite. Let me give my two cents on this one.
Zeitgeist is built on a fundamentally flawed utopian system, does not satisfactorily explain how
it would go about changing public opinion without extensive brainwashing or a brutal crackdown on
competing ideologies, and STILL would not be effective at its stated goal of righting the course
of the great ship humankind because of its hilarious misunderstanding of human nature.
Now.
fuck off, zeitfag
>> [_] Anonymous 04/18/13(Thu)07:02 No.1946974
Don`t reply you retarded fucks
>> [_] zeitgeist 04/18/13(Thu)07:05 No.1946976
>>1946972
Science is utopian.
Actually zeitgeist does explain how to change public opinion, it's called the zeitgeist movement,
Z-DAY, zeitgeist media festival, zeitgeist meetings and the like.
you're assuming that oh I must advocate extensive brainwashing or a brutal crackdown on competing
ideologies because typically that's what a ruthless political scheme does to win power.
there is no scientific evidence to support the idea of human nature just like "man being born
with sin".
There's only evidence to support human behaviour, research feral children.
Make me fuck off anonymous.
>> [_] Anonymous 04/18/13(Thu)07:10 No.1946980
>>1946937
HI GUYS I KNOW NOTHING ABOUT MOVIES, ARGUMENTATION, AND CENSORSHIP
I'M GOING TO DEMONSTRATE HOW AMAZINGLY IGNORANT I AM OF ALL THESE TOPICS IN TWO SENTENCES
>> [_] zeitgeist 04/18/13(Thu)07:11 No.1946981
>>1946980
ad hominem fallacy
>> [_] Help Help 04/18/13(Thu)10:04 No.1947052
Moot please, help us.
>> [_] Anonymous 04/18/13(Thu)10:18 No.1947062
GET THE FUCK OUT
STOP SPAMMING THIS SHIT
NOBODY CARES ABOUT YOUR COMMIE PROPAGANDA
NOBODY WILL EVER CARE ABOUT IT
GET THE FUCK OUT
>> [_] Anonymous 04/18/13(Thu)10:27 No.1947067
>>1946972
>human nature
Obviously you don't actually know anything about zeigeist, because they heavily address that
"human nature" is a social misconception. Even if I agree that the spammer is being ignorant in
this situation, I can't agree with your statements because you're not knowledgeable enough on the
topic in question to form a relevant argument.
>> [_] Anonymous 04/18/13(Thu)10:31 No.1947069
>>1946937
I wasn't saying tl;dr exactly, I was just saying I wasn't going to sit through the whole film at
once because 3 hours is a long fucking time to watch a movie. I watched about a half hour and
thought it was interesting enough to actually care about, my point was that most people on this
site aren't going to watch an entire double-feature-length film about something that actively
aggravates them if somebody who was actually interested in the film couldn't be arsed.
