Have you seen Zeitgeist 2 yet?

No! I haven’t! I didn’t know it existed! I shall go watch it. I’m pretty stable, emotionally.
...Thanks!

Actually, I find it encouraging. Finally, some answers.

For anyone who’s interested, this page is very rough, but has some enlightening info. Particularly good are the series about halfway down on Masonic/Babylonian symbology. You can also look them up on YouTube or whatever under “brave new world order.” Really fascinating stuff. Especially the bit about the magic mushrooms.

Worth a footnote, too, is Benjamin Fulford (both his blog and his interview of David Rockefeller which is posted on YouTube), which at least offers some hope that the world’s elite are not all on the same page.

Should I just dogpile the zeitgeist 2? I knew they were making a 2nd one but I didn’t think it was supposed to be out yet. I thought this one was just supposed to show you how to do your part to prevent?

The ideas expressed in that movie is completely new to me. It would be amazing If it could be done. Just imagine, your whole life revolves aroun trying to be successful, trying to gain profit to pay your debt. When you really could be focusing on trying to help others, curing a disice, finding a new star! Yes a lot of people today has these goals in life, but with this new system, that would be the state of mind for every single human being.

It’s not a different society system, it’s a state of mind.

no and I won’t because that movie has been long time debunked.

@ seven.

The second one has nothing to do with the first.

Ok… I haven’t seen the first or the second one…but have heard a lot about it and i want to know… about both: Are they a load of codswallop before i spend hours watching them…? Who says yay and who says nay?
and Why?

I would watch Zeitgeist addendum. Watch the first 15 minutes and you’ll be hooked.

Both have some good points and some presumptive links.
Definitely worth watching, but not necessarily entirely factual.

@lynneblundell – I’ve only seen the first one. I found it to be very interesting. Take either with a grain of salt, of course.

@fireside and @shadling21 I think i will get round to watching them at some point soon…thank you x

What?! There’s a Zeitgeist TWO?! I liked the first one… I’ll have to go find it now. Thanks! I recommend Food Inc the documentary to you in return.

I saw the first Zeitgeist. It was more true, more honest, and more factual than the average newscast on local or network TV.

It’s worth watching, even if it does contain what some might consider spiritual theories. I don’t think it’s theoretical, though. I think the errors if any, are small.

Now that you’ve asked this question, I’ll have to see Zeitgeist 2, which I didn’t know was made. I trust the producers of Zeitgeist.

I enjoyed the first Zeitgeist and the addendum, but really, I already live a customized version of that. You change the world one person at a time, get goin’ gang. ;-)

I have just finished watching Zeitgeist the first. It is a most interesting documentary which appears to codify (is that the word?) the conspiracy theory of history. Perhaps I may watch the second , but not today. Until I have looked at the Companion Guide pdf the most that can be said is that there is a lot of very interesting theory but until I have seen some text that is all it is: theory. Of course arms manufacturers in the Allied countries were selling to the opposition. It was, and still is, a common practice. That a group of businessmen actually sat around a table and planned the destabilization of the economic system: I beg leave to be skeptical. At least until I see some of the sources. I predict a busy week ahead of me. H.G. Wells spoke about such conspiracies long before World War I and there probably is a reason why Great Britain was once styled “perfidious Albion.”

The expression to describe Zeitgeist is paranoia. Even paranoids have enemies, but all too often one’s enemies don’t know it. Of course elites wish to continue being elites; but that the elite, like everybody else, are in survival mode. If a certain type of behaviour gets the desired results, there is no reason to change. It made sense for the early church to agree with Constantine at the first Council of Nicaea; to do otherwise was to risk suicide. I imagine that for many of the churchmen, adopting some, if not most, of pagan practices/beliefs, was a small price to pay for the temporal support of the Emperor and his establishment. If I sound cynical, it is because I am old enough to know a little about human motives: they are seldom pure. The persistence of the astrological symbiology means that a great many Christians were ready to buy the idea of the birth of Christ on the winter solstice, etc. It would have made conversion much easier for many pagans.