Unveiled and Lifted

2013, Society  -   146 Comments
Ratings: 7.47/10 from 17 users.

Government and politics is something that we collectively should have transcended a long time ago, yet it still exists and it's still part of the average individual's life.

We as individuals have continued to give our power away to people who we think know what is best for us and we're always relinquishing our individual responsibility, our individual divinity to other people who they themselves don't even know what is even good for them. And we continue to do this collectively.

Most of it is because we are all indoctrinated from birth to uphold this sort of status quo of how things supposedly work on this planet. When you're child you're taught from your parents that government and politics is just part of our lives. It just has to be there because these people know what is best for us.

Nothing could be further from the truth, especially when you understand what our government really is. We should be understanding that if these are not natural systems we need to transcend them and try to find out a way for the individual and the collective to move forward pass these illusionary boundaries of politics and government, because that's all they are. They're illusionary boundaries that continue to suppress the individual, which is the suppression of the society.

We can never step into an enlightened society if the individual continues to believe that they need to vote for a certain person, or they need to be part of a certain political party, or they need to uphold the current government. We're never going to move forward, we're going to continue to slip further into the devolution of the specie. The planet will move on, the human species will be gone, because we continue to uphold unnatural systems. We have to move pass them.

To articulate this, the great British philosopher Alan Watts once said:

When it comes down to it, government is simply an abandonment of responsibility on the assumption that there are people other than us who really know how to manage things. But the government, run ostensibly for the good of the people, becomes a self-serving corporation. To keep things under control it proliferates laws of ever increasing complexity and unintelligibly, and hinders productive work while demanding so much accounting on paper that the record of what has been done becomes more important than what has actually been done.

In the current anxiety concerning overpopulation, pollution, ecological imbalance, and the potential of disasters of nuclear fusion, it is only seldom recognized that governed nations have become self destroying institutions, paralyzed and bogged in their own complications, and suffocated beneath mountains of paper.

More great documentaries

146 Comments / User Reviews

  1. Well, I watched the entire program and read all the comments.....What a workout....
    What strikes me immediately about all these comments here is that I can only conclude that humans are still evolving. So many here are quick to slander and to insult anyone who doesn't agree with them, or makes some mistake in grammar, so I view many comments as a kind of 'one upmanship' game, efforts to be recognized as superior in some way, either intellectually or morally. We seem ready to accept that 'I' have the answer, that 'I' have gained some kind of 'edge' over others, that if only everyone would listen to me the world would be such a marvelous place.
    But we know we have mental and physical limitations. I have been wrong over and over again, it's so easy to be wrong, (ask Richard Feynman), or to delude oneself. Listen to your government, and learn that you deserve this conquered continent, or that we have been 'chosen' to be superior to those living on the edge of the Kallihari desert...... And if ever it came to whether you or I should survive because of limited resources, I instinctively know that it should be me and mine who are to survive.
    I think we need to evolve a still larger brain before we can become truly human, but I wonder if even that will help. Survival is still a contest, often a matter of where one lives or what one's ancestors achieved. We can come together if we all want to survive, and we can have enough that no one is in want and decides to steal what belongs to others.
    We need to recognize that two personalities types exist, one who prefers to consume all he has today, and another who prefers not to consume all he has each day, but to put away a small part of his production and save it for tomorrow.

  2. "We're decendants of many cultures physically enslaved, now bare the truama of an emotional cage. We still yearn."

  3. Okay I shall admit I am yet to watch the video but just on the basis of your comments I must respond. After only a couple of paragraphs.....please make it stop!!! Where to start. You suggest in your opening line that this is 'interesting atmospherics for me [presumably you now] to poop on' is hilarious given the rest of your rebuttal. I believe it to be a most blatant example of atmospherics without substance...forgive me stealing your terminology. I shall continue.. 'Nothing but pie in the sky' 'thoughtless casting of the corporation....an oppressor' 'apple is a corporation' 'the artificial limb clinic is a corporation' 'I'm surely against the government schools' are all declarations that you do not explain. This kind of atmospheric drivel cannot be tolerated. You must engage with the issues themselves and explain your logical points if you have any. To state things as negative and make declarations without a logically thought out counter is in my view not only foolish but it is also arrogant. You clearly value your own perspective very highly and not necessarily evidence. Perhaps you believe you are some kind of Logic Knight sent here to save us all from the drivel but then it becomes frustrating when you appear to engage in such a thing extensively. Moreover, the very nature of the corporation is authoritarian and hierarchical so your point regarding the corporation as not at all oppressive is not just a groundless assertion but it is flatly false. There is what we would call a scientific consensus regarding this issue and there are numerous political and philosophical works pertaining to this understanding. Many people may try (in my view erroneously) to explain away such structures as the result of human nature but they wouldn't be so foolish as to completely deny A: hierarchy/subordination and B: the coercion of capital power...which are both extremely prevalent in our society and make your comment regarding the curtailment of freedom laughable.

  4. Okay, please make it STOP! I got 46 minutes and I am so overdosed on mental mastabatory drivel that I must end it now. I should have known from the extremely, inordinate amount of time spent on the opening credits that this is about the people who made it and that is more important than any message or philosophy. As Triumph would say, "Interesting atmospherics... for me to POOP on!"

    Nothing but pie in the sky. Thoughtless casting of "the corporation" as an enemy, a fiction, an oppressor. Boys, the Mayflower Compact was a corporation. Apple is a corporation. The blood bank and artificial limb producers are corporations. I'm surely against the government schools, but your simplistic solutions are impossible unless everyone does it and not everyone will do it without force. So your own solutions, requiring force and coercion curtail freedom. This is lovely footage but it is just masturbation, which is, after all, just fiction too.

    1. We need government to force people to interact freely and peacefully? It's funny, but I get through virtually all my days interacting with hundreds of people without violating anyone and no-one violating me---with not a cop nor government camera in sight. Except "government" people. Extortion, threats of confiscation, the daily taking of my earnings, the controlling of my peaceful activities. We must empower them more to enhance our freedom and levels of peace? And businesses partnering with government force does give them advantages over honest free-market businesses, and so corporations are ubiquitous. That doesn't justify the partnership. You refer to self-gratification a lot; I think you may be projecting your own as you enhance your stock portfolio at the expense of honest hardworking folks.

  5. Thank-you for all of the comments. I see where people are from all of this reading I am doing here and I regret nothing. This project is something dear to both my heart and Justin's...we completed this and are on to the next project where people will undoubtedly love and hate as well :) This isn't bothersome. The fact that it's getting any of you to talk in the slightests about any of these topics, to me, is a win!

    1. Your work expresses concern and love for your fellow human beings and successfully describes the root causes of suffering---historically and today. And you guys are good at what you do! If your work had mass appeal today, it would be just more cultural garbage. NEVER GIVE UP. NEVER SURRENDER (from the pretty good cultural garbage--"Galaxy Quest")

  6. I loved it.

  7. Unveiled and Lifted,

    I don’t agree with this nonsense that educational
    system is focused to indoctrinate children by increasing learning of algebra
    and analytical (Left brain) thinking instead more the art.

    This is total nonsense.

    What the producers are telling us regarding the left
    or right brain is total nonsense too.

    It has total opposite happened in western countries.

    The state creates “Useful I*iots” big
    humanists without analytical and critical thinking skills. These I*iots don’t
    understand algebra, physics and logic.

    Only knowing and understanding the Universal Laws
    and Natural Laws we can go forward as a Humanity with the balance and harmony
    with universal forces and laws. Universe is logical in its creation.

    Those, who created ideologies like communism,
    fascism were not the true scientists and mathematicians.

    In fact, the most politicians are people without any
    analytical and mathematical skills. Most of them don’t understand the natural
    laws, physics, and algebra.

    The Mathematic and science in western countries are
    on very low level.

    Children are not able for analytical and critical

    The right brain must be supported by left-brain.

    And in current time the children are not able to
    think analytically and critically.

    The children are not able to apply and understand
    algebra, and sciences. They become biological robots.

    The Art cannot develop critical and
    analytical thinking. And never done in human history.

    The Humanity history shows only that the art was
    always used as a tool for propaganda, politics, religions and some
    sociopolitical ideologies.

    The greatest thinkers and humanist of human history
    were mostly Scientists, Mathematicians with very sophisticated analytical and
    critical thinking skills.

    Analytical thinking is the key to understand the
    connections between humanity and universe as WHOLENESS.

    1. You're on the right lines at times but make so many logical leaps without evidence that it is hard to take you seriously. I find it funny how those most vocal about the importance of logic and rational discourse are often the most in breach of its most elementary principles...such as evidence. Just so many flagrant and groundless declarations. Hard to know where to start. Here are some of my favourites:

      'The Humanity history shows only that the art was
      always used as a tool for propaganda, politics, religions and some
      sociopolitical ideologies.' (genius)


      'Those, who created ideologies like communism,
      fascism were not the true scientists and mathematicians.' (fantastic observation....thoroughly well explained and thought out)

      Basically I'm happy both your right and left brain are firing on all cylinders.

      Thanks for the informative nonsense.

  8. To the last post. Anarchy is a system of organisation and cooperation and therefore would constitute a civilization itself (some argue the purest form). Furthermore, even if it were not then it would still be morally acceptable to criticise ones society (even though you technically live within it and 'benefit' from all it's flaws and graces). I mean even at first glance this should be elementary. The whole..'if you're not going to cheer on the team then don't stand in the stadium' routine just won't wash with most sensible people. It is clearly not a double standard to criticise the system you live within...think of those that would have critiqued many governments and systems historically (the difference being those others, like say feudal England, you don't have an irrational reverence for). Moreover, if hypocrite means that you apply a double standard (specifically regarding morality) then it really cannot apply to criticisms of large organisational structures levied by individuals (as they are incomparable). Structures themselves (whatever they may be) are not moral agents, however, moral agents (people) can decide that such structures are incompatible with their ideas. Therefore, regarding design, function, operation and all manner of other criticisms they are perfectly within acceptable bounds to do so. It shouldn't be used as a slur against those that happen to be born into, or live within (even benefiting from in some sense) a particular system that they disagree with...indeed, consistently, that is the foremost way progress has been made. Anyway, sorry to be rude, but the bottom line is you're using words improperly. Oh dear...I just realised you put people in quotation marks... severely misguided. The irony of the closing statement regarding your suffering as you journey through your life with your mind and not your feelings is amazing too.

    1. Thanks for thoughtfully reading my "thoughts".
      The reason I used the highly offensive term of using ones mind instead of ones feelings came from the most profound documentary I have seen put on by the BBC probably 50 years ago called the "Century of Self" (if you haven't yet sat through the whole series, I would strongly suggest it) where you (if you were born in the US in the last 80 years) and I have been deliberately conditioned to segue from navigating through life by using our brains to heavily relying on our pathetically fickle, ever changing, often unreliable "feelings".

      At the center of this mass manipulation was a Mr. Edward Bernays the nephew of Sigmund Freud who some call the Father of modern Public Relations who explains how he systematically worked through Madison Avenue advertizing (and his Uncles psychology to move us from consuming based upon our needs (which is how our Grandparents navigated) to consuming products based on how the purchase would make us "feel".

      I was stunned to then see how much I was navigating in my life each day based on my feelings and thus bypassing my brain. If you embrace modern psychotherapy you will find that this "ethos" runs rampant..."Doctors" will always have their patient tell them "how things make them feel".

      Our highly dysfunctional society has come to the place where virtually everything they embrace or jettison from their lives is based exclusively on how it makes them feel...thus we have people wandering this planet complaining about all the restrictive fetters that "laws" have upon how they "feel" (may I politely invite them to "get over it").

      I would love to have the folks who did this documentary sit down (without any mind altering substances) and seriously think about the "rules" they would "feel" (oops, I bet with something this serious, they would want to use their brains) so to "think" what they would be compelled to incorporate if they had the opportunity to have a clean slate and a couple hundred thousand fellow anarchists who "feel" strongly that beating up hippies would make them "feel" very very happy...so "thou shalt not bring harm to those who have no ambition to amount to anything in life and are perfectly content sitting in the woods, smoking pot and fantasizing about a place that only exists where people aren't" might creep onto the record somewhere in this Utopia maybe?
      Also, until liberals can learn to embrace peace in their own personal relationships by not jumping from one mate to another because they can't get along with one single person, or one "significant other" I believe is the politically correct verbiage our society has coined because our narrow minded, mean spirited, judgmental grandma and grandpa called it fornication and adultery but that makes us all "feel" guilty hey?.

    2. I will reply properly later, I apologise this will be somewhat short, but really I think if Adam Curtis is the most profound documentary filmmaker you have found then that probably explains some of your ignorance regarding the things we are talking about. Century of Self, The Power of Nightmares, The Policeman Inside our Heads and many more are definitely thought provoking but the analysis is severely lacking. Man is certainly manipulated by PR and Advertising and this 'invisible government' as Bernays called it in Propaganda (I think it was called) uses base drives and subconscious desire to coerce and control (in multiple acts not least of which is consumption)...still I really don't see how that relates to my point pertaining to legitimate criticism of the status quo. In fact a lot of what you write I don't really understand the relevance of or i disagree fundamentally with the assertion. Such as: 'anarchists who feel (you put in quotes..odd usage) strongly that beating up hippies would make them (the large homogeneous collective about which I presume you're referring) feel (again quotes) very very happy'. You go onto say that all these people want to do is sit in the woods smoking pot and essentially living in a dream world. This is such a broad and ridiculous statement it is hard to know exactly how to respond. Firstly, to write off criticisms by Anarchist thinkers levied against society in such a sloppy and blunt manner shows a lack of knowledge regarding the things about which you are talking. It also demonstrates that rather than think, which you would put in quotes now and claim to do, you have simply felt (probably instinctively and subconsciously without exploring the ideas) and responded to in an uninformed and entirely emotional manner. Again I would reiterate, that kind of blanket critique is more superficial than substantive and ignores the history of progress as well as the complexity of individuals, groups and ideas. None of your criticisms lack any clarity or nuance and demonstrate the opposite of what you claim...logically though completely unmarred by feelings. One last thing, I too am a fan of some of the more grounded and sensible of the psychoanalytical variety and I would strongly advise reading Eric Fromm. Sorry that was longer than anticipated.

    3. I figured this documentary would draw out a few folks who value reason and critical thinking. You will find that most of these commenters bail out as you're getting to the meat of a discussion and they notice you are sticking to a rational process. I hope to find more of your work.

    4. None of your criticisms have* any clarity.....(sorry )

  9. funny how a couple of the "people" on this loony documentary insinuate they are in / from the U.S....sorry guys your Canadian grammar slips were showing.

    To say one is open to "anarchy" while enjoying all the benefits of civilization is as hypocritical as college professors railing against corporate America while slopping at the trough of the financial largess those who they hold in such high contempt provide them each day...seems liberalism can bite the hand that feeds it without any fear of reprisal...try ramrodding a conservative world view down our throats and watch how quickly it's identified as "dangerous"...this group is pushing the 1st. Amendment to the place of shouting "fire" in a crowded and dark movie theater... I would suggest that by shinning a "happy" light on an ethos that has been batting 1000% for the last 6,000 years as something absolutely impossible seems kind of embarrassing...kind of a "visualize peace" bumper sticker conjured up in a vacuum where people transpose their morals upon everyone around them is naive and humiliating for those of us who choose to navigate through life with our minds and not our feelings.

    1. Thanks for sharing your opinion!

    2. So no-one who lives in the confines of our current system can offer critique and suggestions for improvement without being hypocritical, unless they are homeless in the woods (in which case you'll say that "anarchist" is living illegally, and has no authority on matters concerning civilization)

    3. To suggest that "anarchy" is a viable means of functioning (or should I say "dis- functioning") is like saying the best option for termites is burning your home to the ground and not rebuilding. Maybe I didn't listen as closely as I should of; however, I gained a distinct impression that these people believe that Pol Pot, Stalin, and Hitler wouldn't have come to power if their societies had been anarchist?...those men deliberately created anarchy in order to step in with their vision of how a society should function.... and freedom never seemed to make it very high on their list of priorities. Once anarchy wraps it slimy arms around a society, those who never sat on the front row of a John Lennon concert and sang "give peace a chance" see an opening...Anarchy is a vacuum...good people have never been the ones to fill that void...In fact I would go further based on what I see amongst liberals that their divorce rate is extremely high and they seem to be at odds with those that don't think like them, and they are always jockeying for positions of influence, I just can't envision them creating a place in this world that "works" when often their own personal lives are out of control or at odds with those who aren't just like them.

    4. It's easy to denigrate anarchism because as a philosophy it is pretty expansive and attracts a lot of people who aren't very 'deep' thinkers, kind of the way punk rock attracted musicians who only knew 3 chords. That said, I look at anarchism as a conceptual tool that can help devise less exploitative power structures.

    5. Yeah, like Lebanon.

    6. Thanks Pete...you worded it far better than I...it's called participate like the rest of us by contributing half of every dollar you earn just like the rest of us adults who choose to participate in this society.
      Until you pay your taxes you haven't even earned a place at the table to discuss the subject. Pay your dues or go find a club where people are more accepting of deadwood individuals who leach off those who pay there dues and cover for those who have found a way to be so indignant that they refuse to pay for what they get (almost smacks of welfare recipients who grouse about not being able to buy beer with their food stamps...really ungrateful). Non participants don't have the right to sit on the sidelines railing against why they don't like the rules of the club they refuse to join...sounds a little lazy and cry baby to me...go get a real job my hippie friends....have this government confiscate approximately half of everything you make and then you have earned a place at the table where you can run for office just to be privy to all of the sound reasons for why this country operates they way it does with freedom that allows you to snarkily put out a "non profit" documentry with the money you stole from us because we participants have to pay your taxes along with ours to subsidize for lazy deadbeats....ya know maybe a country just for them somewhere far away where they could acquire several hundred acres....oh ya sorry you all don't have any money because work seems kind of oppressive I guess....seems like you all got a problem and I'll cue you in....anarchy is about the stubidest suggestion I have ever heard from people who flaunt the fact that they are not to be trusted or believed.

    7. I've worked and paid my full share of taxes since my first paper route at 12 years old ( Seattle P.I.). Maybe we can go back and forth like this until you admit that you do quite well getting a salary and benefits and generous pension through government confiscation of the earnings rightfully belonging to people with honest and moral services and goods, and it bugs you that some of us hardworking honest folks are catching on.

    8. We can't let our kids become paper boys anymore, learn counting, think about business, how to handle people, sales, responsibility, involve with their neighbors, diversify to lawn mowing, make connections for later life, earn their own money, win contests because the Trade Union-controlled Democrats demand that everyone be paid the Minimum Wage, no matter how skilled, educated, productive, or literate they are. That's the end of paperboys and the explosion in black teen unemployment!

    9. Yep, an increase in a government person's controlling power is always a decrease in the people's freedom and opportunities.

  10. I am disappointed TDF has categorized this into "society" instead of "conspiracy" where it belongs. Bunch of hippy nonsense and created with the involvement of nut jobs, anti-vaxxers, etc.

    1. Which definition do you think they might be held under?
      Conspiracy (civil), an agreement between persons to deceive, mislead, or defraud others of their legal rights, or to gain an unfair advantage
      Conspiracy (crime), an agreement between persons to break the law in the future, in some cases having committed an act to further that agreement
      Conspiracy (political), the overthrow of a government

    2. why on earth would you be disappointed or even care what section its in you r*tard??? all your comment actually infers is that you think anyhting" conspiracy related is for "nutobs etcetc.
      its almost like you only made that point to say this in fact...

  11. Here are my two cents about the above film. Forgive the length of my commentary, but it matches the length of the film, which I found very interesting. It is very artistic for one thing. The visual part is mostly pure illustration to the audio narrative. Most pictures are indistinct, shaping your perception with hinted or subliminal images, the choice of colors, and the choice of transition between scenes, all underscored by suggestive music. It is not particularly innovative, but it is very impressive by its shear length.

    The purpose of the movie is very clear to me. There is a message that is to be imparted and a very logical approach is used to do the imparting. The movie starts up by giving you a personal example to follow. Then it proceeds to cover a number of issues, from corporations to education to spirituality and others. Every time the "system" is presented as evil or misguided, and a better way is suggested.

    The approach seems to alternate between two somewhat different ideologies. On one hand, most messages are in the spirit of a modern libertarian, who has seen the "system" and rejected it because it was wrong. He chooses to lead by the example of personal proactive action, withdrawing from the "system". But there also seems to be an undercurrent of old hard-core anarchist, who hates every "system" on principle, cares little for the rational of his action and actively seeks to bring the "system" down.

    All of the above is further intertwined with so-called "eastern" spirituality. You are both sacred and divine. Physical stuff does not matter, only your choices do. Change comes from within. And a further bit of paranoia is inserted here and there. Forces are out suppressing the natural evolution of human consciousness to fuel personal greed. Darkness of government and violence seeks to swallow your personal light; and so forth.

    The movie (finally) ends by wrapping up its evangelical message through another example of personal action. I (the narrator) have seen the light and changed my life. Come and join me and help spread the message. Very touching, I just wish it wasn't so terribly manipulative and mostly wrong.

    1. Wow. That was genius!

    2. Thanks for watching!

    3. Justin is polite. I had no association with this production or its creators so I'll answer most comments bluntly. Most of you commenters are pretty serious thinkers but fail to acknowledge the most basic assertion of a piece like this: there is no defensible argument for any human, governmentally associated or otherwise, violating the most basic human rights. And you all damn well know what those most basic rights are--- the right to ownership of one's body, mind and honorably- acquired property (property including money, gold and any other currency acquired through voluntary agreements). Any rationale for "government" folks having a special magical status to rightfully violate any human or group of humans (rightfully violate already a contradiction) will use a fallacious argument to do so. Wrong is wrong. After enough propaganda by way of government schools and corporate media---ta dum--- wrong is right for most of you. This is the first society doc I've seen to consistently acknowledge that violation is violation while focusing on what can move us toward a more moral and spontaneous existence

    4. "Let us all as like minded individuals come together to discuss solutions. Let's leave the political rhetoric, bickering and circular reasoning to the Statists. Compassion must be the unifying principle."

      - Steven Carlo Viola

      Cheers Peter ?

    5. I disagree with most of what the film said, but you are not correct either. You say that we all know what "basic human rights" are, but we don't, not really. A system based only on voluntary agreements between individuals has no room for any "rights". Rights are created and enforced by governments to protect individuals and minorities from the majority. And "wrong is wrong" is either naive or self-centered. Who gets to decide? And if I disagree with your decision, am I "wrong" be default?

      Answer this: Should you be allowed to sell yourself to slavery? If not, why not? Isn't your body yours to do whatever you want with it? If yes, should your 10-year old son be allowed to sell himself into slavery? And if you forbid that, are you not violating his rights?

    6. I will answer those questions after you provide a rational answer to this question: how do I voluntarily enter into involuntary servitude (a very reasonable definition of slavery)?

    7. "I will answer those questions after you provide a rational answer to this question: how do I voluntarily enter into involuntary servitude (a very reasonable definition of slavery)?"

      You are playing with words. Slavery is involuntary in the sense that you cannot get out of it through your own actions, you can only be released by your owner. There is no reason why you couldn't voluntarily turn yourself into a slave through a contract. And this once used to be a common way of discharging a debt to somebody.
      To give a modern example: when I signed NDA, I gave up (in small part & for limited time) my right to free expression. I did it voluntarily, yet my current status is involuntary (on that specific topic). I cannot end the contract or alter its terms, only the other party can.

    8. I am assuming that we are agreeing to the basic confines of logical argumentation as I continue this discussion. My basic assertion has been that members of a given society would be better served by a governing body (however assimilated) that cannot take actions that violate the basic right of any given member's ownership of his or her body,mind or honorably-acquired properties. You have inferred correctly that voluntary associations would indeed be the order of the day (let's stick with adults so you don't eventually challenge me with one-year-olds who would die without coercive interventions). Then you proceed to "challenge" me with examples of involuntary associations! Throwing in examples of immoral contracts that disregard my aforementioned basic human rights does not advance your case since I am proposing interaction that consistently respects those rights. Even in our society of government coercion there exists a valid notion of contract law (at least between civilian actors) that would invalidate your contract examples. Each party must actually have ownership of the consideration put forth. Either or both parties can freely default on the contract and return the other's consideration (stealing what belongs to the other would be a violation of the other's rights). Basic human rights are properly inviolable. If you come up with a valid argument that it is right for "government" folks to violate those rights I will likely be disturbed initially, but would find some peace of mind that we are not on such a bad course after all, and apply my energies to more frivolous and relaxing pursuits.

  12. Like every other misguided environmentalist the author demands clean energy, but then decries the only real source of clean(er) energy that we have.

    If you want less coal, it's either nuclear or nothing i'm afraid, because you'll never build enough wind farms, solar panels and wave generators to fully power all of our demands...unless there is a small nuclear core at the center of it all...then green energy becomes a viable alternative.

    We need to stop confusing power stations with bombs!

    1. I mostly agree with you. Nuclear has its place, though the approach to nuclear needs to change. But, I do not remember the author disparaging nuclear power (though I could be wrong - it was a very long film). And even if he did, it would be because nuclear power-plants are run by the "system" and cannot be built by free communities, rather than for any perceived evils of nuclear.

    2. No we need to realise that rather a lot of nuclear power stations are in fact bombs...

      great big filthy, badly maintained, profit grabbing, safety dodging bombs.

      Humanity has already found free energy its just those who have it are charging for it.

      essentially we found free energy -what do we do with it? blow each other to kingdom come and let a few directors and shareholders profiteer with it.
      So instead of liquid thorium flouride reactors and minimal waste we get a pile of stuff we can never get rid of and the curse of weapon too terrifying to use and too dangerous to throw away.

    3. you know that bomb and power station are two totally different things right?

      Uraniaum has to go through a long process called weaponizing before it can be used as a warhead...It would seem like you get all of your information of Nuclear energy from the first series of the Simpsons.

    4. Go and familiarise yourself with the term "dirty bomb" and you will see what im getting at and you will realise how daft you sound...
      hydrogen explosion, fukushima?
      ring any bells?
      if you build a reactor on a fault line then effectively you just built a bomb.
      Now go and watch whatever daft television program gives you your frame of reference.
      also keeping spent fuel suspended above an operating reactor isnt the brightest idea either
      A reactor That just so happens to be installed by a company who turns massive profit by not updating their weapons of mass destruct..sorry..i Meant to type..."reactors" often enough.

    5. Yes i am very aware of the fact you posit also that a bomb and a power station are different things-
      i urge you to go and look up the reason why it is exact;y it is thatwe have such dangerous reactors that we have today- when the proven concept of a liquid flouride thorium salt reactor is much safer and produces no weaponisable decay products...
      i wonder why it was that we ended up with reactors that produce weapons?
      You will find that, whilst they are not atomic bombs in the strictest sense - modern reactors are so very dangerous because we built them precisely like that so that we could make bombs from the leftovers...
      I say we...the american govt being the royal "we" in this case.
      look up the documentary on thorium... its rather eye opening

    6. I think you may be referencing "breeder reactors." I know Westinghouse entered contracts with all its nuclear reactor customers to supply fuel on out to the future because they could produce more fuel, endless amounts of fuel, through breeder reactors.

      Trouble is the Greenies went hog wild with so many lawsuits, roadblocks, political coercion that the plan had to be scrapped and the breach of contract lawsuits endured. France doesn't care. They do it anyway.

    7. No im referencing a liquid flouride salt thorium reactor- the only one ever built was by the us air force- the guy who built it kind of lied that it might power an atomic airplane so they would let him do it..

      oh just go watch the documentary on thorium will you???
      wasnt talking about a breeder reactor -although if you wanted lots of fissile material - which of course can be turned eventually into weapons -then yes you would need a breeder reactor- they are researching breeder reactor technology again (after they found more uranium so they stopped using them) they are however using the same technology in combination with thorium making up part of the fuel...but the reactors are not the revolutinayry flouride ones but are attempting to reduce hazardious waste and close the fuekl cycle

      but it might not matter in any case because of LENR "new fire" or LENRGY- whatever it is called when they figure it out they will name it properly- but its very real...
      real life transmutation of metal, free energy quantum tunnelling alchemy-
      noones quite figured it out quite yet- they can do it but they dont know how or why it happens
      nickel into copper in an exothermic nuclear reaction....quite something.

    8. As Tesla rolls in his grave....

  13. Transcending government and politics is actually very simple. Not easy, yet simple. We refer to politicians and government figures as "leaders". Well, in order to be a leader, one needs to have followers. When you stop following, there goes your leader down the drain. Consider the mounting crises in every aspect of our lives as a push towards making the first step for ourselves.

    1. This is exactly what I say "Stop feeding a parasite and it will die of starvation. No need to fight it. "

  14. Actually, its a good film, I fell asleep.

    1. it's 4:55 here in the U.K and I'm still awake but I'm hoping this will send me right off ;-)

  15. The heavy lifting necessary for sustainable societies has been accomplished in much of the world yet they remain abused systems. There is no need for the drastic mass anarchist type moves. The moves that are needed are relatively subtle and individual. When the mass gets critical change occurs. Governments are the product of the governed. There is no obvious (spiritual if you like) change within those societies. (What's disconcerting is most change happens after societal tragedies.)

    An anarchy type government has at it base a thing called “legitimate laws”. They are the ones obeyed without coercion. Of those imposed with coercion, what is interesting and telling (in the US at any rate) is that there is only one law (that comes to mind) that has been nullified due to lack of public participation, prohibition seventy years ago. There is another that is currently up for grabs; Mary Jane is gaining state by state legalization.

    Those signs signal misplaced priorities in my humble opinion. One would expect to see a move toward self reliance in a volunteer society. Instead the reverse is gathering momentum as the size and weight of governments grow. Governments have found a new drug.

    You'll have to search your own governments for their priority legislative moves. Which ever side of the pond, whatever the legislation, we collectively put them there.

    1. Lucid and informed. Sorry about it only letting me votup 1 time.

      Mary Jane...? I'm a cynic (of course), but I can't help thinking it would really be in the government's interest to allow us all to voluntarily dumb ourselves down. They'd have a field day! I love MJ with all my heart, don't get me wrong, but I've often thought (in those times of deep thought lol) how would I feel if I were forced to love Mary by the state? I would, personally, have a different view about Mary all together (coz I'sa cycnic see).

      So in short, I'm not surprised it's gaining states, it's literally a no brainer!

      ..P.S. anti666? I missed that one. Please elucidate?

    2. I went back and visited the post referred to re: Anti-666. It was a “senior moment”. He was replying to @docoman in the Zen mind doc. That aside I’ll stand by the statement. Some posts you read and others don’t deserve a gloss. I enjoy reading yours.

      “I can't help thinking it would really be in the
      government's interest to allow us all to voluntarily dumb ourselves down”

      There is no need for government assistance there. Media forms and entertainment have been doing
      a great job for over a century. The learning institutions have also played their part at first from the top followed by a trickle down all the way to pre-K.

      I never believed that I would list trust and empathy as negative traits but they have become tools of manipulation that yield tacit consent. I've replaced them both with compassionate cynicism (where applicable) and skepticism (always). Compassionate because the unknowing need a shock to jolt them out of their complacency. It becomes a question of the nature and scope of the shock.

    3. Interesting. You say empathy yields tacit consent and is a tool of manipulation? Trust sure, but empathy? I've been of the understanding that empathy reduces indifference and increases compassion, making a thoroughly noble trait. I have no doubt that you are right in your understanding of it though, so I will certainly give this further thought!

    4. Empathy > Identification Human beings identify with things both animate and inanimate. It’s a psychological thing. See the Century of Self (or the Edward L.
      Bernays contributions to marketing) on this site.

      Anything can be attractively marketed through identification with or empathy for someone or something, humans in need, animals, cars, life styles, movements and things ad infinitem.

      Empathy is a laudable trait when the need is real. When the need is manufactured it is
      manipulation and propaganda.

      The reverse is also a true. Empathy is denied when someone or something is made an “object” through derision.

      Many a documentary will morph drastically when keeping those thoughts in mind. One begins to see some of them as contests.

    5. Following your point (albeit to a simplified extreme), a rape victim can be seen (with some degree of validity) as having been ill-equipped in skills of self-defense. Also in many cases the victim may have lacked adequate skills of critical thinking. All the same, our condemnation must ALL be directed to the perpetrator and his choice to violate another human's basic right to ownership of body, mind and his or her property. Likewise, most populations of people are lacking in skills of self-defense and critical thinking, but I consistently direct my condemnation toward the acts of violation and the human perpetrators in "government" costumes that condone, promote and directly commit violational actions.

    6. I’ve read much of the comments on this doc. There is confusion in the use of the term anarchy. There are three definitions of the word and many more expressions of it in action. It’s a little tough to address confusion.

      However, toward your comment, a person should not be violated by another in any way and should have no need for critical thinking or self defense to remain safe. Unfortunately that’s not the case in the world today. So where does the problem lay?

      For an example of all forms of anarchy in action consider the history of the internet and the interaction within this worldwide community. It’s quite instructive.

    7. In my studies of history, I find the collecting of "tribute" to be an ongoing and troublesome theme. Once a group of men ("governors" I'll call them) are able to con the greater society of productive folks into paying tribute to them, it is up to the governors to utilize the wealth wisely to maintain the ruse. Whatever the rationale for the tribute is, much is spent to aggrandize that rationale to instill a sense of need among the population to continue paying tribute. When the ruse fails to work on a number of skeptics, but the governors still collect tribute from them, we use the term taxation today to describe the act of extortion required in that case. As long as enough of the population continue to fall for the ruse, the governors have a pretty good shot of "getting away" with violating the minority (imprisoning, torturing, threatening, etc.) to attain their hard-earned goods and coins. Successful governors spend much of the funds on propaganda to maintain that majority of dupes at a high level of stupidity---a stupidity so extreme that the duped majority can't recognize outright violation when it happens. The U.S. Constitution intentionally left out a solid protection of property rights, allowing for that ever-present scheme of collecting taxes. Harmless enough until it isn't harmless. The U.S. governors have wisely utilized large amounts of the funds on propaganda. Where does the problem lie? The problem is a 3-way partnership: 1) the existence and actions of the perpetrators and 2) the existence of the propaganda programs that are further deluding the population into submission and cooperation even as their brothers and sisters at home and throughout the world are violated on a horrible scale and 3) a high level of stupidity among the general population (or more politely---a lack of critical thinking skills). My favorite solution is to counter the number 2 and 3 problems---peacefully of course. Although it is necessary to expose it at every opportunity, attempts to counter problem #1 right now would be violent, foolish, and ineffective.

    8. You ask the most important question of all---where does the problem lie? In my
      studies of history, I find the collecting of "tribute" to be an ongoing and troublesome theme. Once a group of men ("governors" I'll call them) are able to con the greater society of productive folks into paying
      tribute to them, it is up to the governors to utilize the wealth wisely to maintain the ruse. Whatever the rationale for the tribute is, much is spent to aggrandize that rationale to instill a sense of need among the population to continue paying tribute.
      When the ruse fails to work on a number of skeptics, but the governors still collect tribute from them, we use the term taxation today to describe the act of extortion required in that case. As long as enough
      of the population continue to fall for the ruse, the governors have a pretty good shot at "getting away" with violating the minority
      (imprisoning, torturing, threatening, etc.) to attain their hard-earned goods and coins. Successful governors spend much of the funds on propaganda to maintain that majority of dupes at a high level of stupidity---a stupidity so extreme that the duped majority can't recognize outright violation when it happens. The U.S. Constitution intentionally left out a solid protection of property rights, allowing
      for that ever-present scheme of collecting taxes. Harmless enough until it isn't harmless. The U.S. governors have wisely utilized large amounts of the funds on propaganda. Where does the problem lie? The problem is a 3-way partnership: 1) the existence and actions of the perpetrators and 2) the existence of the propaganda programs that are further deluding
      the population into submission and cooperation even as their brothers
      and sisters at home and throughout the world are violated on a horrible
      scale and 3) a high level of stupidity among the general population (or more politely---a lack of critical thinking skills). My favorite
      solution is to counter the number 2 and 3 problems---peacefully of course. Directly countering the perpetrators is foolish and counterproductive at this time.

  16. the fact is that change will happen...one way or another & i prefer young idealism (with all its flaws & gains) over old conservetism (just gaining flaws!) !it's a rocky road we will climb but at the mountain top the view of the past will be as differing as it was the way up.

    1. I like that analogy! Only, you just know there'll be a big fat taller mountain right in front of it. So I say, don't rush. Take your time, be sure footed, build relationships and take in the view - life is what happens while you're making plans.

  17. every moment is the most exiting time to exist....right

    why are these people using hypnotic techniques to relay their message? repetitive background music, flashing images.

    Hey guys is the message so fickle?

    1. Everyone has their own editing style, I've been creating pieces like this for years, feel free to look at our channel or search my name on Youtube!

    2. You call it style, I call it tried and tested technique. But, worse is that this was actually painful on the eyes - Reading your quotes and then being bombarded like that...relentlessly for that length of time - I thought this was your first effort. Saying you've been doing this for years doesn't exactly do you credit.

    3. Thanks for watching!

    4. hes right- i cant watch it. style over substance, makes my eyes hurt like one of those american cop shows where all the camera operators seem to have collectively succumbed to a professional form of twitching in an attempt at "realism".
      very real- if you have parkinsons.

      I dont know what the substance of the piece is because the director cant lay off them it seems (substances that is) and neglects to consider some of his viewers may have epilepsy...

    5. That first paragraph has me in stitches! :-D love your posts.

    6. They were a lot funnier when i was allowed a bit more swearin.,,, but when we got all these visitors and proper comments like what the huffington goat has got- all that had to stop.
      Vlatko has done an amazing job.

      I only get away with it because im part of the furniture...and when he hits a 50000 score on that twiiter game thingy i want a cheque mailing.

    7. :-) ...sounded harsh I know, I look forward to your next incarnation. Since you didn't respond badly to criticism (biggup) I thought I'd balance the books a bit.

      Based on your comments, I think you achieved what you set out to, so congratulations. Moving forward, I would really like to see what you can achieve without feeling the need to use every crayon in the box.

      ...that's the crux of it. Read more below if you feel like (not necessary).

      The opening segment worked fantastically well in setting the mood and clearing the mind, and the opening track was original and worked really well. It went on longer than a film's intro and so I was a little shocked that all those names never actually "appeared" on screen. So you built up to an anit-climax there, a bit.

      There are many of us out here that are dedicated to watching most everything that comes along, to do with current affairs, sociology, the environment and personal development. To even attempt (imo) to encompass all these in to one documentary is either foolish or brave. I once had a dinner party for 9 of the fussiest eaters. To cater for all, the end result was a bland meal no-one liked...what on earth is the point of even trying to cater for all? It appears to me you were doing the same (re subject matter), whilst at the same time 'styling' to a certain demographic :-/

      So did you pull it off?

      Clearly for some yes, you presented a positive and informative message to a targeted, attentive, but younger audience (the average demographic here on TDF matches that target...though I doubt they comment the most).

      But, for the 'experienced' discerning viewer, you created a mishmash of unfocused snippets, that reflect more the frustration within yourself than delivering and asserting a mission of genuine substance.

    8. Don't worry about it, on every article, video and forum there has to be at least a couple of self-involved 'haters' who go around trashing everything as if they could do better. They fancy themselves some kind of know-it-all experts on everything. The truth is they probably don't even know how to upload on youtube nor could they hold a half-decent conversation about the topics touched on in this doc. The most they can do is 'that's not realistic' and 'things will always be the same'.

    9. ...Would you care for a saucer of milk? :)

      Personally, I'm a graphic designer and software programmer (20+ years) and am quite capable thank you of uploading a video, making a video and will be producing my own weekly webshow this year (ftw!). So I reckon, yes, in time I can do better. In fact one day, I intend to. My most commonly loved best trait (by women)?...my mind...I'm left handed and dexterous, which I believe has partly helped fine tune the important right side of my brain, and allowing quite capable 'half decent' conversations I absolutely assure you.

      ...Get off yer horse and drink yer milk.

    10. 'Freedom of speech! yeah boooy, just watch what you say': Ice T

  18. crticising documentaries for targettin emotion is rather childish.. the majority of people respond to emotional subconscious cues and tend not to be so rational, so if you want your ideas to spread and be taken seriouly, engaging emotions is a prerequiste in this fast paced adhd environment.
    now criticise them for false information or unsupported claims, not for the medium used to communicate the ideas and its format. I notice this a lot on this site... and its mostly used as a red herring to distract from hard hitting arguments put forth.

    1. that's actually very true...PR 101.

    2. What a nice world twould be if everyone was capable of using logic like you, thank you sir

  19. Sounds a lot like Scott Joseph.

  20. I made it till 45 minutes.
    I'm 51, and my generation had the same ideas as the people who spoke in this doc.
    Not much has changed.
    I think that if every single person in the world broke free and lived off the grid, off the land and all that-we'd still end up in time right back to where we are today.

    1. Wow, aren't you an unimaginative defeatist.

    2. because gods forbid someone should have a realistic opinion.

    3. "we'd still end up in time right back to where we are today"
      How is that realistic? Where are the facts and evidence to back that up? I don't know if you are a student of history but human society and culture varies widely by geography and time period. I don't understand where he got that from, and it's really anti-intellectual to make such a banal statement and then defend it by saying you are just being realistic. The guy is 51. He may think he knows everything about humanity and civilization, but it just isn't so.

    4. The guy is a gal...(you would think her name would give that away) and in her defence, as I believe she is right...this programme is focused directly at 20 somethings (there's evidence aplenty for that)...she was once a 20 something and heard all this, then...and here we are today and things are no different from then, (regarding the problems, our place, our purpose and our spiritually).

      So in fact she is speaking wisely, with wisdom that came with age.

      But be careful, sometimes... age comes alone.

    5. How does the handle 'bringmeredwine' say 'female'? Regardless, their gender is utterly irrelevant. Just because things haven't changed much since the '60s (which is really very recent in terms of human history, so that's not saying much at all), doesn't mean they can't change in the future. Sorry but just because someone is in their 50s it doesn't make them a sage or savant.

    6. Seems obvious to me...but I'm slowly reaching her wise young age...hey maybe I'm a savant!

      on the rest of your blabbered retort (and sulky down voting)...

      [Digi has left the room - don't forget to leave your mark here]

    7. I guess this 20 something left you speechless. It happens.

    8. No doubt.

    9. You’re gaining a fan with your pragmatism and subtle interludes. It seems anti-666 called it right.

    10. Hey I'm all for a bit of feisty banter...I enjoy it...and you look like Jane Seymour (in her twenties)...I love J.S... so don't take me the wrong way, I'm just bumpin hips with you really. ;-)

    11. I must admit, it is rather easy to mistake Eleanore Roosevelt for a man. JK.

    12. DigiWongaDude meant that I am a woman.
      (who likes red wine)!

    13. I know, just making a joke about Eleanore Roosevelt. FDR probably needed the red wine too! JK

    14. I once read some where that Eleanor had a female lover/companion. Her secretary perhaps? I wonder if it was true.

      Subject: Re: New comment posted on Unveiled and Lifted

    15. I heard that too! She was ahead of her time.
      Her and FDR did have a cheap wedding, since they were cousins, they only had to invite one side of the family.

    16. They were COUSINS, really?
      That's why I love this site, I learn something every day!
      Too bad I can't remember anything!

    17. That's what they always say, "realistic/reality" And get this you ever notice the use of the word reality always stands for a negative outcome or state of being? Who wants to live like that?

    18. The reason reality appears to have a negative connotation is because, for the most part, we all start out as idealists and end up realists.

      For the most part. If you can remain childlike (as opposed to childish) and believe in your dreams (for "The future belongs to those who believe in the beauty of their dreams." - Eleanore Roosevelt) then you (and I) are not for the most part, and so reality/realism/realistic is nothing but a fleeting distraction to what could be.

    19. They have a hard time imagining things could be better. Imagine if Thomas Jefferson and co. had the same attitude. Humanity is about evolution - we learn as we grow from child to adult, and we can learn from our mistakes, innovate, and apply our ingenuity to society. Some people would rather just say 'oh well, that's the way it is'. As if society hasn't changed drastically since the dawn of human history. Of course things will change! And they will change for the better if more people use their brain and take action, rather than being defeatist naysayers. Hopefully it's just the baby boomers and they will all die off.

    20. Is it logical to contend that the course of human recorded history has managed to it's present state of evolution with generation after generation avoiding positive hopes for themselves or their progeny? Has humanity simply forgotten to think [and act on] good thoughts?

    21. Thought precedes action. I think it's obvious that when a group of people have a shared goal, they can accomplish some pretty amazing things, that outsiders/spectactors/naysayers would probably deem impossible. Say, landing on the moon or landing a rover on Mars (NASA), launching a world-dominating company from a garage within a decade or two (Google), or rebelling against what was at the time one of the most powerful governments on earth and starting your new country from scratch (the founding fathers). There are many societies that have gotten it right in so many ways -- many of the N.A. tribes (yes I know some of them were bellicose, but many others were described as supernaturally loving, peaceful and generous); there are still tribes in the Amazon today who model the kind of individual freedom, cooperation and egalitarian/democratic society that most Americans could only fantasize about; and even many EU countries such as Sweden, Germany and Denmark are ideal countries for work/life balance, with free (subsidized by taxes of course) quality health care and education, robust economies and very happy citizens, in general. Are any of these examples utopian? Of course not. But it's foolish, in my opinion, to say that things will never change or could never get better. The only reason nothing is changing for the better is because people are not being proactive. They think because they lived during the '60s they've seen it all and then some. See 'bringmeredwine' poster above for a great example.

    22. That was inspiring and impressive. No buts.

    23. Hey thanks. :)

    24. To use an overused modern cliche,

      This is your last chance. After this, there is no turning back. You
      take the blue pill - the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe
      whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill - you stay in
      Wonderland, and I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes.

      Over-written drama no doubt, but it does illustrate a human condition(ing) of varied ages and epochs from homo-habilis to homo-technicus

    25. whoever down voted you is a sad sad person

    26. cool story bro

    27. It's not jst through experience and maturitythat I arvd a my conclusion.
      Did life get any better for the "haves and have nots"
      in Haiti, the Congo, Sierra Leone, after the French Revolution, The creation of the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia, Ethiopia, the Arab Spring?
      Yes? Really?
      AND I never wrote the word "realistic" nor do I claim to be an intellectual.
      Let's talk again when you're out of diapers, LMKIA.

    28. my response to the word 'realistic' was to anon, who responded to you. I guess you didn't realize that, you were too busy being a know it all. There are several social structures that have been proven to work well and that could work, and principles that could be applied (ie, permaculture), but instead you want to talk about the Congo. And again, you are only thinking of your limited perspective and knowledge, how things have been over the past 50-100 years. Human history has much larger scope than that. And your insult in the end really speaks volumes about your maturity. You sound like a petty grade schooler.

    29. Wow! You've really got your knickers in an uproar!
      Are you over your tantrum, yet?
      Get over yourself and go do something constructive.

    30. You're the one throwing a tantrum because you were schooled by someone younger than you. Sorry I know it hurts.

    31. I'm not throwing tantrum, I'm laughing!

    32. I agree, your ignorance is laughable!

    33. Totally agree, I was thinking the exact same throughout. Then I was asking myself, is this where the self help bookers have migrated to? And the transitionalists of Dec 2012? All you have to do is listen to some sixties music and it's all this and more.

      These are strange days for sure, BUT...same important issues song being sung. So ok I criticise...what I would like to have seen is not a 'you are divine and should do such and such...' but a '...look at this and what these guys are doing, be inspired, and join in too!' documentary.

      That's mostly why I'm criticising - this kind of thing has been done over and over and over. If these days are so different - let's see something different.

      However, I did make it all the way to the end, but only by having to look away from the screen - man that editor must have been trippin' on something! Also, I'm glad I got through it as the end 30 mins in pretty 'uplifting' and the end credits gives the websites of all the interviewees if you wanted to look more in to them. Nice touch. A generous 6.5/10

    34. "I think that if every single person in the world broke free and lived off the grid, off the land and all that-we'd still end up in time right back to where we are today."

      Not quite. We would end up where we were about 5000 years ago. Everything good (and bad) we achieved as society was because some of us could break free from subsistence farming.

    35. Agreed.
      Some people will want more out of life, and the society of have and have nots will once again be perpetuated, and some people will want to be in charge.

  21. Allegorical rhetoric and imagery designed to target the emotional rather than the rational.

    1. Because you lack the knowledge on how to dig your way out of hell doesn't mean we all lack the knowledge?

    2. Not one word of that is untrue. Well said.

    3. Wayne Bab Ruth had a record of the most home runs at one time. Few people know this but he held another record at the same time, the most strike outs. Do you even get up to bat? Geeees!

      How do you account for successful people at what ever they do?

    4. He is stating an objective fact, not a subjective opinion. The proof being that you can not state where his words are wrong, only his theoretical attitude, which has nothing to do with the objective remark. You can not call someone on being a pessimist when they are responding objectively. That would (in turn) only be an irrational emotional response. Lol, it would be like me saying to you "You obviously think Bab Ruth was a loser." Nonsense.

      Read Wayne's words with a clear pair of eyes and you might see.

    5. Digi i respect your coming to the aid of the besieged.

      "irrational emotional response", Right

      Digi good night

    6. Hi Digi Man, excuse me for interrupting, but isn't it Babe Ruth?

    7. face palm...pass the bottle?

    8. Anytime!

  22. I have mixed emotions with this doc. cudos on taking charge towards self determination, freeing oneself from the injustices of society and returning to a more sustainable way of life.
    However, regardless of how the narrators may spin it we are still human beings the last time I checked, we get sick, we grow old and frail and we die. We are not gods, we are not the end or the beginning of anything. There is nothing eternal or absolute about us! I would hate to be at the mercy of any human who claim divinity and other godlike prerogatives.

    1. " we get sick, we grow old and frail and we die" that was fully acknowledged in the doc. "I would hate to be at the mercy of any human who claim divinity and other godlike prerogatives." I assume you mean [special or unique] divinity which would put the doc in full agreement with you. Their use of divine nature is not clearly defined but was consistently in reference to each and every human without prejudice.

    2. Peter he doesn't understand your last comment, "Their use of divine..........." Move on let it go. This is a leper colony we're dealing with her. Could be contagious? So many of these pore soles have tried to drag me down through out life that i am immune. It never dawns on them that their negative view of life might be wrong? They won't even give you a maybe. They settle in to the BOSOM OF #SS HOLES ROTE and call that life?

    3. Wow, that's pretty demeaning.
      Why are we being reprimanded for stating our opinion?

    4. bringmeredwine for what it's worth I am not attacking the spirit just the mind set you. You do have every right to your point of view. I am not an organized religious person I despise it. I have witnessed so much Divine intervention through out life here in this country and in War. And to listen to "jack.jones is more then i can handle. Pore ignorant lifeless fools. Please just go away.

    5. I'm about as religious as a tree stump, myself!
      Thanks for responding.

      Subject: Re: New comment posted on Unveiled and Lifted

    6. To listen? how bout you go away? No one is forcing you to read other peoples comments.

    7. Please don't take my argument out of context. That's not what I'm saying at all. Divinity can only be rightfully claimed by a being that is eternal and absolute. It cannot be matter because matter cannot act by or of itself, it has to be acted upon. Human beings are not the oldest specie on earth though compose of matter so that of itself repudiates the conception of a divine human.

    8. I'm confused; we can't act by or of ourselves? (We are composed of matter)

  23. wow, just wow... the "humanities" are more important than mathematics?? compound fractions, algebra, and logarithms are "useless"??? what absolute horse s**t. ok, enough of this complete stroke job. circular logic, outright falsehoods, and appeals to engage in self deception... yep, sounds like the typical "solution" doc to me. all empowered by the non-corporate lifestyle derived from smart phones and the internet, social and intellectual balkanization, and long nights of singing cum baya.... feel good nonsense with NO basis in reality offers no solution, only further suffering.

    1. Mr. Nutzack, I have appreciated your analysis of the human condition in past posts, but I wonder if you watched the last half hour which contained profound solutions. I have sensed that you reject institutional solutions, so that I wonder why you would reject solutions involving individual initiative out of hand as you expressed.

    2. Harry can't Peter, he see's "reality" as negative no matter what he applies the word to. If one perceives the world as holding them down and their not Atlas? This type of mind set is both the jailer and the jailee. Its a cult.

    3. The last half hour proposed some actions. They may even be helpful on some scale, but they are not the solution. One one hand, the author wholeheartedly rejects the modern industrial society. On the other, the kind of lifestyle suggested here absolutely requires it. Building a community wind turbine or a solar farm requires long global industrial chain to manufacture them. Having enough time to putter in a community garden requires intensive industrial agriculture to meet your basic caloric intake.

  24. and 12 minutes further on, we get "divest both economically and socially from governance, "society", and corporatism"... the symbol of this "new found freedom" they choose to demonstrate it? their damned Iphones... libertarianism wrapped in hipster mumbo-jumbo. "balkanize among the like minded, and reject all interaction with dissenting personalities".

  25. roflmao! just under 10 mins in, and a quote from marcus garvey... lololol. the "freedom" he brought to liberia with the repatriation movement was the plantation system as practiced in america. "meet the new boss, same as the old boss".

    1. I realize Garvey has a history applauded by some and looked down on by others, but it is that brief passage that I was drawn to. I'm sure other objections can be made to other people quoted in the film as well. And concerning your comment on there being iphones and then anti corporate sentiment, I see your point, but at the time it seemed like the best visual portrayal of "we have the world's knowledge at our fingertips" I could have used a laptop or other source for information and the same charge would be leveled. I needed a visual to showcase a point. This was a personal project produced by two friends with no other goal but to help awaken people to their own innate power, put together in our own creative way with no concern over its broad appeal or ability to be mainstream. It is art. Agree or disagree, but in the end, thanks for taking the time to watch.

  26. Canada should be annexed by the US so we can enjoy 2 amendment rights and freedoms. The world produces 250,000 people a day and 200,000 of these are being replaced by machines.So few of us can make it anymore that we should all be able to end our lives immediately for the good of the planet and making things more heavenly for the wealthy elite.

    1. if you think a firearm empowers you, you're lying to yourself.

  27. Currently in Canada, there is no party on the left. The NDP has gone centrist, the Liberal (in name only) Party is allegedly centrist, so are the Greens and the Tories are conservative. In the recent BC election, these three centrist parties were wooing the same voter so each got roughly a third of the vote. I fear that in 10 yrs, there won't even be a middle class in Canada. Sure, this group feels very threatened, but I'm going to join the majority in Canada-those who don't vote because there is no one for me to vote for.

    1. Go back to your drum circle.

    2. I know how you feel, but I'm proud to be a Canadian.
      I just do the best I can in my own little world.
      Our politicians drive me nuts but there's not much I can do about it.
      I am not defined by people like Mike Duffy or Stephen Harper.
      I'm just..."Me".

    3. And you should be proud. What a marvelous accomplishment.

    4. I take it you are being sarcastic.
      At least I don't go around hurting people.

    5. Maybe you should run for an office, if you think that you can do better. You'll have my vote.