Freethought Nation

The thing about character assassination is that it is hard to "put your foot down" when the assassination is something like this:

"Acharya S is a pseudo-scholar, who cites discredited people."

Now, I don't agree with this statement AT ALL. I think people who say this kind of shit are idiots. But they haven't really done anything criminal. If someone said the same thing about Peter Joseph, or any other progressive researcher out there, I wouldn't want them to be shut up and censored. This is not the gestapo.

I totally appreciate Acharya's work, I am amazed by the level of scholarship, and I am disgusted by the kind of ad hom attacks she gets, but not all of them are subject to being censored. People have opinions. They may be wrong. But they can still have them. The answers are not to go 1984 on them and at any slight hint of antagonism, demand the other person be silenced or something. As though it would destroy someone's image to have empty rhetoric spewed about them by some anonymous forum poster.
Big woop.

If people are convinced by that kind of empty rhetoric, then chances are they are probably convinced of anything anyways. If someone releases Acharya's first name, BAM, that person is banned and is never asked to return. Post is deleted, and the damage is minimized. If someone begins to attack Acharya (or ANYONE else for that matter) in a negative light to the extent that it is not only empty rhetoric, but there is deliberate and PERSONAL offensive language, etc...that person is banned.

But come on folks, there is no benefit to getting ultra sensitive about ad homs.
The rest of the people who Peter uses as sources are not held up to this kind of untouchable standard on the forum. I have seen people blast Ellen Brown on the forum for her book Web of Debt. I have read MANY posts where Peter, Jacque, Roxanne Meadows, John Perkins, etc were slandered and so on. Not to mention members themselves, and NOTHING happened. Why? Because it is hard to know when antagonism has gone too far.

The movement is not distancing itself from the VALIDITY or VERACITY of Acharya's work. Whatsoever.

The movement is however, suggesting that:
-Religion is a controversial topic.
-Questions about specific evidence and details that people may want would best be answered here.
-The movement is trying to cater to as many people who share the same basic goals: a world without wars, without scarcity driven money, where information is free, where we achieve our greatest potential as a species. If they happen to be religious, but still hold those values very highly and want to participate, it is hard for them to do when part one of ZG the movie is being shoved down their throats. Just the same with people that do not think 9/11 was a false flag event. Nobody is forcing them to agree. I have seen numerous MUCH WORSE attacks than Acharya ever got, directed at Richard Gage and Steve Jones by the way.

Anyway, it's a bit of a difficult situation. Peter's first film was his own. This movement isn't just his...it is a collective. It becomes tricky to maneuver in this situation.

And Freethinka, if indeed it has nothing to do with money I totally apologize for even suggesting it. It's the first thought that came to my mind. I imagine that in these economic hard times, information like Acharya's isn't the most critical item that most people have inelastic demands for. I think most people are worried about food, heating bills, gas money, rent, etc. And be that as it is, I was just surmising that book sales may not be where anyone here would have hoped for, for Acharya.

If I am mistaken about that I deeply apologize. It was an honest hypothesis, and I didn't mean anything more by it.

Look, the bottom line is I really don't know what the big deal is. People are badmouthing Acharya. That's a shame. But people badmouth other people too. In fact in more serious ways at times. Barking at them and censoring them for minor ad homs is not going to make them either change their mind, or solve any problem. The answer comes with education. Censorship has a purpose, but not as a first line of attack. When it gets SERIOUS, and there is deliberate and obvious malicious intent that can actually cause serious damage to someone, it's time to act. But we all have to be MATURE and understand that we cannot just censor someone for saying a mistruth, or for stating their opinion about another person.

It depends on severity and maliciousness.

Here's a gradient:

"I question the conclusions of Acharya S"
"I don't think she has a PhD, therefore she's probably a flimsy source of info"
"Acharya S is a poor scholar who uses discredited sources"
"Acharya S has an atheist agenda and tries to hide it behind the guise of informing people"
"Acharya S's books are junk and I wouldn't ever recommend anyone to read them"
"Acharya S lies in her books and she wants Christian children to die"

Maybe the last comment is ban-worthy. The rest are just idiots being idiots. I'm not going to support banning an idiot just for being an idiot. How many years has Acharya been known as a comparative religion scholar? How many years has there been this policy that any criticism of her gets lashed out at at even the slightest negative comment? Has it worked? People continue to do it. Clearly banning and censoring isn't the way to solve it.

Lower down on that up-tightedness. It's OK. Just because some fool makes a dim-witted comment on a forum doesn't mean SQUAT. You guys, and Acharya should have realized this by now. If you should be mad at anybody, be mad that there weren't good enough and quick enough responses by MEMBERS of the ZM. Don't blame peter or the mods. And certainly don't assume that just because those people aren't censored and beaten with clubs that it is promoted by the movement to say negative things about Acharya.

But again, it's not a damn gestapo.

I'm sorry I normally side with Acharya and with TBK/Freethought Nation on most cases, but come on folks.

But...since apparently the ZM members are not doing a good job of defending Acharya, and can't answer some of the more technical questions about her research (for instance I have not read Christ in Egypt yet) what better place to direct traffic than here?

I'm being totally objective here about this by the way. I was a member of TBK way before TZM. And I have been a supporter of Acharya's since years and years back. I have to say though. There is a bit of over-reaction to this ordeal from this side. And Freethinka, I love you buddy, but you are at times a little too hostile with people. And I understand that they are hostile first. I have never seen you INITIATE any hostility, and I very much appreciate that about you, but an eye for an eye leaves the world blind friend.

Peace guys. Seriously. Peace.

_________________
http://www.positivelyfalse.com

Be excellent to each other - (Bill and Ted)

Actually, it isn't. It's a basic rule in most all forums.


Nobody is suggesting that


I'm not asking for anyone to be banned.


You down play how serious this issue is for Acharya. She has to deal with it everyday. It's old and we're ALL burned out on it.


Yes, we're past all that now.


Fair enough. I appreciate your apology. Books are considered a 'luxury item' people can live without them, they are not necessities.


You're not helping this situation at all by downplaying it like this. You are penalizing the victim.


Having basic common sense rules against character assassination is not censorship. Those rules are in place to help create an atmosphere for a higher level of discussion. Don't expect to get much education accomplished without a few basic rules of respect.


No, it's not okay. You are not helping this situation at all at this point. You might consider stopping. I know you're just trying to help but you're really not. You're making it worse and I don't think you realize that - because I know that's not what you want.

What I'm hearing from you is that character assassination is fine, that Acharya should be used to it by now. And we prefer the smearing, libeling, character assassinating trolls over those who've actually studied Acharya's work, who're addressing the trolls and trying to set the record straight. Asking for a basic rule against it like most forums do is asking too much.

I'll remember that for a very long time. It's like blaming the rape victim for being at the wrong place at the wrong time. We've never asked for any special treatment ... I'm just asking to stop defending the damn trolls over those who address them and their smears, libel and character assassination in an effort to set the record straight. I've already shared examples of that. It makes us feel like WE ARE THE ENEMY at TZGM forum. I think I've explained all this as clearly as I know how about 6 times or more now. You guys are clearly not interested in returning the favor. No point in beating a dead horse.

Maybe it's time we distance our self from ZG1 as well? What do we get out of it? - we get all the abuse and no support. We certainly don't make any money from it.

_________________
2013 Astrotheology Calendar
The Mythicist Position
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
Stellar House Publishing at Youtube

I don't recall anyone calling for censorship. Where did that come from? No one is calling for censorship as far as I know, just enough respect to penalize those starting the problems instead of those trying to defend her. It's simple. Putting your foot down would be to warn someone that personal attacks are not allowed and that if they continue action will be taken well before things get out of control.

Thanks for the examples. That's what I was trying to get to in the first place:

That is pretty stupid. If I come across any crap like that I'll address it in such a way that the mods shouldn't have a problem with it. What I don't get is why in the hell some sort of Christian apologist sounding person would be a part of TZGM to begin with? Someone who would make a comment like the last one on the list should also be someone who sees TZGM as an NWO Luciferian plot... Were they on the forum to criticize the entire movement, as well as Acharya, or what? That just doesn't add up if it's coming from a member of the movement.

_________________
The Jesus Mythicist Creed:
The "Jesus Christ" of the New Testament is a fictional composite of characters, real and mythical. A composite of multiple "people" is no one.

The celestial Origins of Religious Belief
ZG Part 1
Jesus: Hebrew Human or Mythical Messiah?

You know I think a character assassination rule would be a good idea. Not for anyone in particular, but to protect all forum members and as a show of respect to all people -this could also help us remove the people who post conspiracy bullshit because, for example, posting a topic 'Obama was born in Kenya' or something like that would also come under the banner of character assassinations. I'm going to bring this up.

_________________
http://brentoneccles.com

I'm glad you're seeing it Brenton. It's a good idea to protect "all" from personal attacks. That's really all we're getting at.

_________________
The Jesus Mythicist Creed:
The "Jesus Christ" of the New Testament is a fictional composite of characters, real and mythical. A composite of multiple "people" is no one.

The celestial Origins of Religious Belief
ZG Part 1
Jesus: Hebrew Human or Mythical Messiah?

I'll bring it up when I can. We're all run off our feet at the moment.

_________________
http://brentoneccles.com

Y'all are good people.

I think I should just make something clear here: my views actually do not reflect the ZM's official stance on anything. I'm not a mod there, I'm also not a member with any kind of responsibility or voice.

So please, don't think that what I say is anything other than MY OWN opinion.

Now, as far as that goes, I'm not here to start any shit. I like Acharya, I hate to see her libeled, I hate to see it when people libel anyone in fact. I hate it when I do it to others as well. It's just a bad policy.

I think the only thing with respect to this subject we may be unclear about is just what constitutes as "character assassination" and what doesn't.
You brought up rape, which actually was a bit of an unfair comparison, but...hey what they heck lets go with it...
Even with rape, there is a spectrum. When is it rape and when is it not? Consent during the act, and regret after? Is that rape? Mixed signals? Impulses? The "rapee" didn't explicitly say "no" and the "raper" didn't know to not proceed? Etc...

Most things in life reside on a sort of spectrum. Especially ones that require judgment. And in those cases you will find that for every person that interprets the act, there will be a possibility that there can be just as many differing opinions.

So I am not in any way supporting those who do say negative things about Acharya. What I do suggest is that perhaps our definitions of "character assassination" are not equivalent. Thus when we both use that term, what we refer to is a bit different.

What say you Tat Tvam Asi? Freethinka? Anyone else?

How do we come to an agreement about how to define that term?


Right, well, not everyone on the forum is in support of the movement (surprised? ). So sometimes people are on there in apparent disagreement with everything. There you go.

And as far as someone who makes that last statement I gave as an example...what should the mods do to such a person? Probably say something like "Please respect the rules of this forum and do not spread falsehoods about people. The next time you do this it will result in a loss of posting privileges." But nothing like that was stated. It was more like the comments about sources, or the word "pseudo-scholar" and it's just so hard to call that libel in my mind. I mean, I think it's wrong, but that's not libel in my book. If that's libel then it's just the same as saying "Fresco is just another closet communist." I don't see people getting even a warning for saying things like that.

I dunno, maybe I'm just too lax on this kind of stuff. Maybe I need to think about it more...I'm open to that possibility.

Either way, you guys all have a good one! Please, no harm intended.

Peace.

_________________
http://www.positivelyfalse.com

Be excellent to each other - (Bill and Ted)

I consider Acharya a friend and am (as many may have noticed) contributing to this website. I help both her, and the ZM - but I see them as separate in their work to a certain degree. But as I've said, I'm going to bring up the idea of a character protection rule at the next Moderator / Communications team meet up we have.

_________________
http://brentoneccles.com

Don't worry about it Paradigm, I think I get what you're saying. My position here in all of this is one of investigation. I'm trying to see some of these attacks for myself to figure out how to classify them. I've joined TZGM forums and I've posted about Acharya's works and my association with her and her works. I've just stepped into the arena myself and now I'm waiting for whoever has a problem with her and her work to come at me personally for my association with her and her work. This way I can observe the entire chain of events as they transpire, if they transpire.

As of right now everything has been pretty positive with my visit the movement. So I'll just hang in there and see what happens. Perhaps you can join me in discussion over there as I've posted about the benefit of knowing the astrotheological structure of religion, the mythicist position, and I've also started a thread where a straw man personal attack has been launched against Peter Joseph himself during a rant about collectivism. PJ watched the parts of the film where they quote mine him and he's offered a response to the quote mining.

_________________
The Jesus Mythicist Creed:
The "Jesus Christ" of the New Testament is a fictional composite of characters, real and mythical. A composite of multiple "people" is no one.

The celestial Origins of Religious Belief
ZG Part 1
Jesus: Hebrew Human or Mythical Messiah?

Brents post
"vendetta"???

Is that the same guy who tried to sell ZG DVD's and got caught so he went into a tirade against ZG? Did he originally have the website "zeitgeist movie is fake. com" or was that someone else?
viewtopic.php?f=19&t=1961&start=0

_________________
2013 Astrotheology Calendar
The Mythicist Position
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
Stellar House Publishing at Youtube

Don't know. I'd have to say I think Peter will eventually change his mind to some degree about conspiracyscience.com because the guy actually does support The Venus Project.

_________________
http://brentoneccles.com

Well, that's an odd way to put it. Just because the guy might support the Venus Project doesn't make his website attacking the ZG movies correct or worthy of support.

I don't see anyway to support someone like that at all. People on the net can spread around whatever trash they want and they take absolutely no responsibility for it. This Conspiracy Science guy Edward has obviously not been held accountable for anything.

_________________
2013 Astrotheology Calendar
The Mythicist Position
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
Stellar House Publishing at Youtube

Agreed



Right on Tat. I'll make sure to join you in your threads there. I appreciate your plan of action. Seems very reasonable to me.

Peace.

_________________
http://www.positivelyfalse.com

Be excellent to each other - (Bill and Ted)

I for one have no intention of defending Acharya by way of getting too overly hostile or out of line. I simply want to try and reason my way through the problems that are presented. It would be nice to have some others from the mythicist camp who are also members of TZGM join in discussion and add their views on the issue of distancing the movement away from the platform of the mythicist position.

_________________
The Jesus Mythicist Creed:
The "Jesus Christ" of the New Testament is a fictional composite of characters, real and mythical. A composite of multiple "people" is no one.

The celestial Origins of Religious Belief
ZG Part 1
Jesus: Hebrew Human or Mythical Messiah?

I'd like to thank everyone for their participation in this thread. We've gotten quite a few misunderstandings out in the open and even cleared them up. So, I'd like to thank you for that.

We've established:

* That TZGM's distancing from the two movies is more for clarification purposes declaring that TZGM is not the movies but rather, it's the activist arm of the Venus Project. It is not a distancing from Acharya's work as Peter Joseph made clear, "the religion section is the strongest of the whole work."

* So, to work synergistically with TZGM, I have created this thread for TZGM forum to direct people who desire that information, Zeitgeist, Part 1 - the Documentary Evidence

* At some point, new common sense forums rules may be put in place at TZGM forum to help guide folks towards better forum etiquette. Forum rules against character assassination and personal insults is not censorship. Those rules are there to help create an atmosphere for a higher level of discussion. Which is especially important when trying to create a positive future.

* According to the Movement Orientation Guide on page 80 religion is "false and outdated."

Religious fanaticism can be very dangerous and divisive so, I'd like to offer thoughts in hopes that TZGM might consider taking a more clear, stronger stance towards religion with the future in mind. We don't want to see TZGM lose the momentum stirred-up by ZG and inadvertently bury the info in ZG1, once again, as it was over the last 2,000 years. Keep in mind that the Acharya camp doesn't want to be boxed-in by ZG1 and shouldn't be because her work expands far beyond the brief ZG part 1 basic intro into astrotheology. We have much to offer future generations with a new model or paradigm shift concerning religion, as found in the Mythicist Position.

TZGM/Venus Project offers several revolutionary changes to the current structure. So why not have a stronger, more clear position on religion to go with it in order to carry us into the future? Jacque Fresco has an outstanding resume but I don't see any expertise on religion. I don't know his religious background or history since there's not a single mention of religion in his resume. I'd be curious to find out. What are his views on ZG part 1? What experience does he or his associate Roxanne Meadows have with religion?

We in the Acharya camp can fill that gap. In a new model of religion, faith and euphoria would no longer trump the evidence that actually exists. It's vital that future generations be made aware of and have access to astrotheology and the mythicist position because there are forces at work doing everything they can to ensure that they don't (so much for help from the Illuminati, NWO, Satan etc, how dumb or fooled do folks need to be to actually believe that Acharya has ANYTHING to do with that). We have very serious concerns regarding the future of religion - while Christianity may be currently on the decline, Islam is definitely on the rise and spreading fast. That has the potential for a new, modern day DARK AGE. It must not be allowed to happen.

TZGM folks need to be aware that there is no overall mythicist position to turn to in any dictionary or encyclopedia. The only place you'll find a well defined mythicist position is in Acharya's work.

Why the Mythicist Position? Because it takes us far beyond the endless Theist vs. Atheist debate. Neither really has much else to offer and the debate between these two perspectives is never ending, old, tired and burned out. "Agnostic" is best defined as, "noncommittal" - again, it's not any sort of solution.

There is a fourth option that actually delves deep into the origins of many religious concepts examining the primary sources identifying many of their origins as myths personifying natural phenomena i.e. Astrotheology, taking us to a new level of understanding never accomplished before.

People don't have a mythicist position option to turn to and they should. If the Euhemerus / Evemerist position has existed since the 3rd & 4th centuries BCE then the mythicist position should finally be made available as well. The fact that it's not and the fact that hardly anybody is aware of astrotheology and its myths concerns me - it's precisely what's missing from the discussion.

Evemerist vs. Mythicist Position thread

The Mythicist Position

_________________
2013 Astrotheology Calendar
The Mythicist Position
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
Stellar House Publishing at Youtube