Can I interpret this as being your way of saying "actually I only wanted to
promote my new list, I'd already made up my mind about the movie & didn't
actually want to *discuss* it, especially if it was going to end in people
criticising it as being a utopian view, because I would prefer to think of
it as not being unattainably utopian"?
I particularly like the way you criticise snark & then make a snarky remark
of your own
Let me ask, do you fit into your own definition of the "snarky" demographic?
"Catherine" doesn't sound like a particularly masculine name to me by the
way...
-----Original Message-----
From: Z Moser [mailto:roachgod69@hotmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 12:58 PM
To: idm hyperreal
Subject: RE: [idm] Zeitgeist: Addendum
I think this is a romantic vision of primitivism. I am uncertain if this
would classify as Utopia. Then again I don't really believe in any utopian
systems.
Anyhow. I do think this conversation may be going on to long Off Topic. And
i understand people like to have fun with it; because its very cool to be
snarky and cleverly pessimistic. It is an especially high ranking status
symbol for 18-35 year old men in our culture. Good job guys! I've stirred up
all the discussion I want to here. If anyone is interested in joining a
earnest discussion (or talking more shit) about creating a workable future
for all join me here:
http://groups.google.com/group/zeitgeistmovement?lnk=gcimh
Long live the metavirus,
zaq
quoted 6 lines Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 12:55:20 -0500
> Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 12:55:20 -0500
> From: cexwell@gmail.com
> To: idm@hyperreal.org
> Subject: Re: [idm] Zeitgeist: Addendum
>
> the path to the utopian dream is so easy! continue with things the way
they
quoted 1 line are, occasionally debate about how bad it sucks, and wait for the oil to
> are, occasionally debate about how bad it sucks, and wait for the oil to
run
quoted 13 lines out.. or at least require more energy to get out of the ground than the
> out.. or at least require more energy to get out of the ground than the
> extracted oil would provide.
>
> without the oil, the population will not be able to stay at its current
> level.
>
> those who survive the massive die-off get to live in utopia.
>
>
> 2008/11/12 Z Moser <roachgod69@hotmail.com>
>
> >
> > The first half-hour is about the fractional reserve monetary system and
how
quoted 10 lines it doesn't work. Then it goes into how debt created by the fractional
> > it doesn't work. Then it goes into how debt created by the fractional
> > reserve system is used to create wage-slaves and exploit third-world
> > countries. The last part gives a vision of the future based on a
> > resource based economy.
> >
> >
> >
> > From what I am understanding you are saying that the fractional reserve
> > explanation makes sense, but that debt-slavery/exploitation and resource
> > economies don't? Do you have a solution? Or do you think that the
fraction
quoted 23 lines reserve monetary system is the best we can get?
> > reserve monetary system is the best we can get?
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks for the input,
> >
> > zaq
> >
> > > Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 11:27:37 +0000
> > > From: catmail_2004@yahoo.ie
> > > To: sam@forum8.co.jp; idm@hyperreal.org
> > > Subject: Re: [idm] Zeitgeist: Addendum
> > >
> > > i agree - anything after the first half an hour was shite
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > From: Sam Marginson (FORUM8) <sam@forum8.co.jp>
> > > To: idm hyperreal <idm@hyperreal.org>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, 12 November, 2008 6:34:20
> > > Subject: RE: [idm] Zeitgeist: Addendum
> > >
> > > I thought the movie sucked pretty badly, just quietly. It had some
merits -
quoted 2 lines the section about the economics of our situation was somewhat
> > > the section about the economics of our situation was somewhat
> > interesting.. however, there was no detail about the path to the utopian
dream at the end
quoted 9 lines -----Original Message-----
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Z Moser [mailto:roachgod69@hotmail.com]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 12:20 PM
> > > To: rick@glowdot.com; idm hyperreal
> > > Subject: RE: [idm] Zeitgeist: Addendum
> > >
> > >
> > > Oh. I get it. Its not that it's because it isn't IDM. Its because you
have a
quoted 12 lines bias. In that case I will ignore you.
> > > bias. In that case I will ignore you.
> > >
> > > Thanks for being clear,
> > > zaq
> > >
> > > > Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 18:59:18 -0800
> > > > From: rick@glowdot.com
> > > > To: idm@hyperreal.org
> > > > Subject: Re: [idm] Zeitgeist: Addendum
> > > >
> > > > Charles Goodwin wrote:
> > > > > Ya know, I never quite understood why people get so upset every
time
quoted 1 line anyone posts anything that is not directly related to IDM, the same
> > > anyone posts anything that is not directly related to IDM, the same
thing
quoted 4 lines used to happen on the Tech-house list and now its dead.
> > > used to happen on the Tech-house list and now its dead.
> > > > >
> > > > Because this is the IDM list not the FW: FW: RE: RE: RE: FW: RE: OMG
> > > > ZEITGIEST MIND BLOWN MUST SEE BU$$SH = HITLER CONSPIRACY list,
that's why.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org
For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org