|
I've found that enough of Zeitgeist is grounded in truth that it makes for a good starting point for the encouragement of free thought and, given that the person has some amount of common sense, it should propel them into actual enlightenment.
But this is what makes it propaganda of the classic kind. A lie surrounded by truth. If everything was a lie it would be easily shot down, but instead give enough truth that they buy the lie.
For example, for my party, the Atheists, we have the fantastic spokesmen Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, and the more mean-spirited Christopher Hitchens. Now, if you've ever attempted to read their material, it's not necessarily the most exciting prose out there (specifically the work of Dennett), and when it is exciting (Hitchens) it just comes off as rude and volatile. As such, while we may think their opinions are the best of the best, our opponents will call them out as boring nonsense and angry rants. So, something has to act as quick convergence before deploying the much more truthful, less radical works to even them out.
I've been an atheist long before it was cool, and the only atheists you heard about was that wacky American Atheists League or whatever they were called. You are right that the style of many of the vocal atheists is a turn off for those who don't already have atheist leanings, but thats a different issue from something like the Zeitgeist. You won't 'convert' anyone to atheism by making them look stupid, but it doesn't make the message any less true, its just done in a confrontational way that conflicts with peoples egos. On the other hand the Zeitgeist tries to guide you to erroneous conclusions, and in my opinion assumes you are gullible enough to buy it all.
__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host
Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.
|