Thoughts on "Zeitgeist" for Ryan and Maddie

So I watched the film, finally. Though I knew a little about it from what you’d told me, and from hearing bits of your conversations with Mom, I basically had no idea what I was in for. In that regard, I went in with an open mind, although I admit it became hard to remain open after a certain point.

But I’ll get to that in a minute. First, I want to discuss what I liked about this film.

If nothing else, “Zeitgeist” should get the viewer to be rather pissed off with what we’re told by our government and, more importantly, by our media, which is the means by which our government gets its message to the people. It should get people to look at the media with greater skepticism, thereby motivating them to think more critically about what they hear, see and read. It should make people demand more from their media sources, and also more of themselves (by demanding higher levels of proof and evidence instead of just the latest sound-bite).

Unfortunately, in my experience, these films don’t actually have this effect. People get upset for a day or two, and then they forget about it. The truth is that it’s rather difficult to stay informed about a broad group of topics. Limiting ourselves to just topics covered by “Zeitgeist” we would need to be informed about politics, history, economics, religion, current affairs, government…on and on. Even educated people have trouble being this informed.

However, I rather think part of the point of this film is that being uninformed is the problem. Difficult or not, we need to be informed. That it’s hard is no excuse.

I also think this film clearly points out a need for the general American public’s need for better media education. Our populace has little capability when it comes to interpreting the media. As a writer, this is basically my area of expertise, and I know full well that interpreting the media is most often about understanding what is NOT being said. We need to learn to read between the lines, to intuit the story behind the story, or else our view of the world will remain limited, naïve and misinformed.

However, any admiration I may have for this film basically stops here. And while you may feel that knowing I disagree with the film is all that you want to know, I think it’s important you understand why.

My greater disagreement with “Zeitgeist” is that if it actually inspired the reaction I just voiced above (critical thinking, media interpretation, etc.) it would immediately lead you to realizing that almost everything this film purports is complete crap.

Still, it is somewhat well-orchestrated crap.

Let me show you how.

The film begins with emotion. This should be your first clue that everything to follow is not going to be a scientific argument (which is fine if you’re watching a religious or philosophical movie, but not so good if you’re watching a movie that’s supposed to be factual). A good logical argument based in fact starts and ends with facts. It doesn’t need emotion, because the facts should convince you all on their own.

So all the mood music and emotional images of war (to thudding drums no less) and bleeding and dying children…well, every time you hear this shtick you should be reaching for your wallet, if you know what I mean.

That aside, the next important point is to note how “Zeitgeist” frames its arguments within half-truths. This is the hook.

In Part One, we get the religious history, which the film gets at least partially correct. Yes, Christianity is a bastardization of many pagan religions. This really shouldn’t stun anyone in our modern world (except that, sadly, most Americans are stunned…which only shows how ignorant our people really are).

Yes, ancient people’s worshipped the sun and the Romans basically shifted the Sun to the Son. Yes, the Bible and all its stories are myths intended to be seen allegorically, not to be taken literally, hence much of the mythology is connected to astronomy (the irony here is that, as sophisticated as we are today, most of us believe in the literal truth of these stories, while the ancients understood they were allegorical…go figure). Yes, Christianity adopted much from pagan religion precisely for political reasons (mostly to keep the Empire from falling apart, partly because the Romans were actually good rulers who didn’t demand the people it conquered to convert).

Yet, while there are these half-truths, a great deal of the film is then filled in with information that is completely inaccurate.

For example, Horus was the god of the sky. Ra was the god of the sun. Eventually, these two gods morphed into one, “Re-Horakhty,” which even then clings to their original division (the hyphenated name instead of a brand new name). Horus and Set did not battle every night and day. They battled once, and Horus cut off Set’s testicles, making Set the god of the desert (because he was now infertile).

The actual connection of Egyptian night and day cycle comes from Ra’s connection to the goddess of the sky, Nut (night). At dusk Nut swallows Ra. Ra remains within her uterus until morning (god only knows how he ends up in her uterus) when he is born again.

Horus was not born on December 25. He was born in August. His mother wasn’t a virgin. His father was Osiris, who had sex with his mother, Isis, and they conceived.

In connection with Horus, there is no star in the east, three kings, new-born savior, 12 year-old teaching, baptism, walking on water, and no one ever called him The Truth, The Light, Lamb of God, or the Good Sheperd…at least not until “Zeitgeist.”

While I could continue detailing the number of misinformed facts and outright lies that take place here, be sure that they aren’t restricted to just Horus. “Zeitgeist” gets its facts wrong regarding each and every deity.

This kind of couching of falsities with half-truths continues throughout the film. I’m not going to list them all, because that would simply take too long. I will however list some of the ones I find more salient.

1) All of the reports of the hijackers being alive were later reported by those news agencies to be cases of mistaken identity.

2) The hijackers paper trail of funding is incredibly easy to trace (why make it difficult when you know you’re going to kill yourself?). There is evidence linking at least $400,000 in funding to the hijackers from bin Laden.

3) Steering a large jet into a huge building requires little skill. The skill in flying is in landing and taking off, neither of which are important if you’re planning on blowing yourself up.

4) Assessments of what the Twin Towers could withstand (engineers reporting the towers could take a hit from a 707) are irrelevant, because the engineers did not imagine a deliberate attack…they imagined a 707 with low fuel flying at low speed hitting by mistake…not the much larger 767 full of fuel crashing directly at full speed and angled so as to hit as many floors as possible.

5) While it may look like a controlled demolition, it's not. A giant building always collapses in this fashion, and when the floors start falling the tremendous force always causes them to go in the same direction…straight down.

6) Building 7 is mentioned numerous times in the 9/11 Commission Report, on pages 301, 310, 319 and 322.

7) Air control on 9/11 failed because they didn’t anticipate the threat, not because of some mysterious military training going on that day. All of the protocols were based around the concept that a hijacker would keep the plane in the air, find a landing space far away, and demand ransom. Further, response would have been ineffective anyway, as by the time authorities had been told of the hijackings the planes were already flying into buildings.

8) The American Revolution was mostly a result of a lack of representation, not the banking system. In reality, had King George merely granted the colonists’ request for a vote in Parliament, it is likely we’d all still be British subjects.

9) A central American banking system was originally proposed by Alexander Hamilton, one of the founding fathers, and not because he wanted to put everyone into debt. Hamilton understood that the only way America would be one nation was if the country had a single financial system. America’s ruling class at this time did not go along with this idea simply to enslave the people. In fact, many of the founding fathers disagreed with Hamilton, and this issue was debated endlessly.

10) The Federal Reserve is private, but is also overseen by Congress and has a board of governors with seats for congressional officials. It is not an organization outside or above the law.

11) The 16^th Amendment was fully ratified by 36 states when it came before Congress.

12) The IRS code clearly sets the law regarding income tax. The law is plain in 26 USC Section 1 regarding each individual, Sections 61 and 64 discuss where income is derived, Section 6012 and 6151 require that you file a tax return in general, and Section 6072 requires you file an income tax return specifically.

Again, I could continue, but won’t. Further, though, almost every single quote in this film is either A) rewritten and misinterpreted or B) completely made up.

So what do I conclude?

My opinion is that this film is one more example of pseudoscience, a particular bugaboo of mine that you can see for yourself I’ve been railing against here on my blog concerning global warming. Is it convincing? Yes, of course it is. Pseudoscience is supposed to be convincing. If it wasn’t, no one would believe it.

Conspiracy theories are one of those things people WANT to believe in. They fall into the category with alien abductions, Bigfoot, Elvis sightings, and the Loch Ness Monster. People want to think these things are real, but the facts show us clearly that they are not. Conspiracy theories make great movies. They just don’t make much in reality.

As far as this film opening your eyes, I would caution that when your eyes are opened the first thing to do is check your facts.

Unfortunately, the business of making informed conclusions means you have to do a lot of work. You must read. You must study. You must think. You must tear apart ideas and put them all back together again. This is the only way to get to wisdom.

Most people don’t want to do this work. They are content with watching films like “Zeitgeist” and taking it entirely as fact.

I feel that you did better by calling people and asking them for their opinions, by sharing these ideas and being open to responses. That shows forward thinking.

However, if you want to open your eyes, the only way to do so is to educate yourself. And educating yourself means work, study, reading, etc. It ain’t fancy, but what you learn about the world will make you a better person. I guarantee it. The only real question is whether you have the discipline to educate yourself or not. Either you do and you will, or you don’t and you remain ignorant. There’s not really any halfway-house.

If you want some help here, I’ll send you a few books regarding this very subject. Carl Sagan’s “The Demon-Haunted World” is a whole work against the dangers of pseudoscience. I read it in high school and it was, for me, the nail in the coffin of religion and pseudoscience both. Sagan is a brilliant writer (ironically, Sagan is in “Zeitgeist”…he’s the guy near the end sitting and talking about how one world fighting with itself will only fail), and this book is my favorite of his works. Also, Joseph Ellis’s “Founding Brothers” is a great introduction to the American Revolution, and there are whole chapters regarding Hamilton and national economy (this book is quite short, too).

But if you’re looking for a path in the world, I’d suggest the same things I always do. Read more, because books are good for you. Listen to rock n roll, because it’s good for the soul. Find something to do that helps other people and has nothing to do with helping you, because doing something for others makes our lives meaningful.

And steer clear of propaganda.