Watched Zeitgeist recently. Itâ€™s an interesting movie which starts off with one facet of society and ends with another. The movie is divided into three parts: religion, the 16-18th century financial manipulation of America and the present financial manipulation of America. The movie starts off with one of the most influential aspect of our society: religion. Though it concentrates only on Christianity, it does provide interesting co-relations between the various faiths. For example, did you know that:
1. The names of deities which introduce laws starts with the letter ‘M’ (Manou-Hinduism, Mistra-Egyptian, Moses-Christianity)
2. The different faiths have a common denominator of 12. All of them have 12 disciples/students/cycles which are ultimately based on the 12 zodiac sighs?
3. The various religions of the world are highly interlinked with astrological symbols?
4. The various religions all have the concept of ‘ages’ (Yug-Hinduism, Aeon-Christianity etc)
The list is endless. Although books like the ‘Templar Revelation’ and ‘Aristotle and Religion’ do point out the similarities between the ancient Egyptian religion and Christianity/Judaism, this is the first for interlinking multiple religions. The movie does not cover all and concentrates only on Christianity, but the vague passover it gives to other religions (Ancient Greek, Egyptian, Hinduism etc), does provide some food for thought.
The most interesting part of the analysis provided is its corollary with astrology. The movie compares the tenets of the various religions with astrological symbols like the zodiac, the movement of the sun through the various zodiacs, the time the sun stays in each sigh, the importance of the various zodiacs, to name a few. This analysis does raise some answered questions like:
1. How did the 12 zodiacs come about? Why 12? Why not 13/14/15?
2. How did the significance of each zodiac come about? The movie provides one statement on this; that Aquarius is the water bearer as he ushers in spring in the northern hemisphere. But is it uniform across all geographical regions?
3. The time the sun takes to make one revolution across all the zodiacs is taken to be approximately 26000 years, consequently around 2150 years in each zodiac. The movie does state that this was a well known calculation across the entire ancient world but does not provide any explanations as to how the calculation came about.
To be fair, it would be asking too much for the movie to explain anything and everything, as it would be impossible to fit into the 45 mins allotted to the religious aspects in the whole film. Thus, given the time constraints and the necessity in picking the most relevant aspects of the Theo astrological religious faiths, the movie does very well indeed.
The second part gets more specialised. It deals with the financial institutions in the US and its influence on the government, its people and the way of life there. In an indirect way, I suppose itâ€™s relevant to the rest of the world as the US financial model of central bank and central interest rates are widely emulated.
The second part alleges that the Federal Reserve and the federal income tax are as constitutional as Guantanamo bay. It goes on to say the roles the top financiers (the Rokerfellers, Morgans etc) plan in government policies including domestic issues like the great depression and stock market crashes and international issues the country’s decision to take part in wars etc.
A very interesting analysis which is best observed by watching the movie. The second part flows over to the third part which deals with the fraudulence and lies behind 911 and the invasion of Iraq etc. Again an interesting analysis better observed by watching the movie as he puts it in a far better light than all my words would 🙂
However, itâ€™s worth applying the concepts the movie propounds to the movie itself. The basis tenet of the movie is that not everything told in the papers and expounded by the top brass is to be trusted. All information given should be checked against as many sources as possible and taken with a pinch of salt. The same could be applied to the movie too. The whole film makes a lot of allegations which I have heard before in various other highly reputed sources (foreignaffairs.com to name one). Thus, am sure they have some truth in them. But itâ€™s worth taking what the movie says with as much as critical eye as we take mainstream information. After all, the whole purpose of the 1 hours 56 minute documentary is to ask us to be critical of the information we receive 🙂
On that note, itâ€™s also worth noting that the movie is also biased towards anti-establishment and thus is to be questioned. For example:
1. The narrator states that most of the people who tried to enlighten the people ended up getting killed. However, the documentary also quotes numerous people actually giving their points of view to support the narrator’s claims. And these people are not even high profile people. How could they do it and still live?
2. The narrator mentions hosts of highly classified files which even the top brass do not know about. If thatâ€™s the case, how does he know? Are we to presume that he as a simple narrator/director (whoever researched the information) as access to information which not even the president of the United States has? One part of the documentary even states that the mentioned parties in a certain passing of bill changed their names to protect their identities, how does he know that?
Thus, although the movie has some flaws, its worth watching for the attempt it makes in providing logical, rational explanations to a number of going onâ€™s at present.
After all, the only way to really verify the truth would be to look at the original documents, memorandums etc which is out of hand for most laymen isnâ€™t it?