New Adam Curtis Documentary, HyperNormalization

youtube-dl should just werk.

I'm using it now. Shit will take a while and it's split up into a shitload of fragments.

that's just how the download works. it pieces them all together in the end.

youtube-dl 'iplayerurlhere'
Will spit out an .mp4.

I guess I never noticed it. I usually don't download foreign stuff. It's going to take 6 hours on the proxy I'm using.

I watched it, now im questioning what the fuck to do with my life. Its mind blowing. Its unbelievable. Its horrible, i mean god fucking horrible. i wish i didnt watch it. Blissful ignorance at least left my with hope and optimism for society. Now its fucked. Its all fucked. its brilliant. Its psychologically challenging to the highest degree, and i hated every moment. I might embrace the nihilism.

bumping to find others whove watched.

smh everyone would rather reply to "post x of what x have done" threads. Seriously, someone else mustve watched this, it cant just be me

...

Uh, after watching one of the trailers for it I suddenly lost all interest in watching it. It was the part where he talks about Putin having an advisor that uses illusions, obfuscation and backing liberal, progressive, nazis and communist/other parties and groups to create discord and then via this confusion (along side massive lies and illusions in the media) consolidates power in the selected or chosen candidate.

… which is pretty much a description of the US political system. And the US media. And most of the western tactics to control people domestically.

Putin, on the other hand, plays more or less a 'centrist'-like 'strong uniting leader', and Russian media (alongside pretty much all non-US media, and UK media for that matter), has been very clear and consistent on its line.

I'm not sure I could stomach watching through it, if that's how it's going to angle it, just another projection out of the empire. Sad, if that's the case - considering it's Adam Curtis.

For those of you who've watched it, is this a huge segment or just a tiny part?

I knew previously he was somehwat of a con/neo con, but it didnt stop me from enjoying his work. Alot of it is devoid of politics, of course it has Curtis' spin and bias, however he presents the facts as such, facts. As for what he believes, the older i get and the more mainstream politics i properly delve into, the more i agree with it.

Tiny part that leads on to talk about what you mentioned, how the US and the west as a whle have used the same tactics to keep reality in a suspended state of near-peril. Its good if youve watched bitter lake, his previous film, as he was mentioned in that two. Curtis likes him because it truly illustrates how reality itself is a toll of political spin.

that segment on surkov was just used to illustrate that the same thing is happening in the West .

Once this finishes downloading. Does anyone know how to put shit in mega?

It's been a long time, but I remember you have to register - which is really quick, just use some throwaway email. Then you upload it and get the link in return. Nothing special.

Cool beans. It's pretty big, so it will take a while. I was almost tempted to just use bittorrent.

supposedly the files are up on passthepopcorn already. anyone got an account?

Seconding the request for pass the popcorn invite or account

american here, can i get a link that works?

youtube-dl --proxy [insert_proxy_here] bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p04b183c/adam-curtis-hypernormalisation

If anyone has that account or any other access to the video then just grab the file from within the browser. Upload it and share it.
That's way better than having to give new invite to every user.

[spoiler]nice dubs[/spolier]

Be patient.

cool. thanks. waiting for link

cool, a file showed up on piratebay but it's not HD and it has no seeders.

which pirate bay are u using?

thepiratebay.org

Now you can start reading Baudrillard. I recommend "The Agony of Power", one of his last and more positive works, where he thinks about how one could still possibly oppose and stand outside of the system when the system has become so powerful, omnipresent, and capable of integrating everything.

Oh Dear
youtube.com/watch?v=wcy8uLjRHPM

still waiting on the link.

guess the guy who was supposed to upload it bailed, like a good trot would

see

s i m u l a c r a

a n d

s i m u l a t i on

Okay so
I just finished it, and I didn't find it so interesting as the fact that I'd already believed 99% of what was said in it. What's striking is that it's a BBC documentary, leading me to question myself a bit on the worthwhileness of my own ideology for obvious reasons. In terms of a film, I'd give it an 8/10 tbh. Highly emotionally impactful, very artistically varied for a docu, and well-worth watching, even if you disagree with it. Jolly good show tbqh.

status update?

About 1.5 hours left. Still have to upload after that. We're going to be a while.

Gentlemen the torrent is up, happiness!

it's a shit resolution

...

ffuck, really? well, its not a big wait for the good rip to come along, cheers'

Should have watched Bitter Lake family.

Excellent historical doco on porky fucking the Mideast and his new doco is a sort of spiritual successor to the themes in Bitter Lake

I've seen that too, just forgot to add it to the list

What is youtube-dl?

youtube-dl is a command-line program to download videos from YouTube.com and a few more sites. It requires the Python interpreter, version 2.6, 2.7, or 3.2+, and it is not platform specific. It should work on your Unix box, on Windows or on Mac OS X. It is released to the public domain, which means you can modify it, redistribute it or use it however you like.youtube-dl [OPTIONS] URL [URL...]

if you are fine watching it as an 800mb mp3 rip (still good quality don't know why people are bitching)

thepiratebay.org/torrent/16055882/BBC_Adam_Curtis_HyperNormalisation_WebRip_x264-MCTV

I regret wasting my time on this one because in the end it went fucking nowhere. Do the rest of his dumb documentaries actually have substance or is it all the same shit?

The Power of Nightmares is pretty good.

Almost done, niggas.

thanks man.
I'll seed for a bit.

I finished watching this earlier. Fucking bleak, if much of the material is hardly revolutionary.

Yessssss

REEEEEEE GET OUT

They're all pretty much the same; analyses of why things are as they are; "why/what went wrong." He suggests no remedies, and consistently remarks that "no one" has any or can ever think of any. My guess is, that's because he knows that massive, structure-altering violence is the only solution, but doesn't say so, because 1) it would betray his image as some sort of enlightened intellectual, given that non-state violence is considered barbaric; 2) he can't/won't admit it to himself, because it would defy his liberal ideology and be too psychologically confronting; 3) or because the BBC simply won't air such a radical message. Or perhaps he doesn't know, and is just genuinely naive.

They are entertaining, though.

The beginning is basically talking about 1970's SJWs screwing over the working class.
Seems like a repeat of the same thing.

Honestly, I'm going to be charitable and go with option three. Frankly, the fact that any of his stuff is even allowed in mainstream, that is in itself shocking to me.

Quick screenshot while this uploads. At 4% now on mega.

nah, he really isn't a leftist.

nice. what DE?

I thought it was a comment on the problems brought about by attempting to apply "machine logic" to markets, the environment, and society.

But yes, the sprawl did get dizzying, even if the stuff about there being no true stability in nature and that scientist becoming insanely compassionate in despair over the "selfish gene" hypothesis

was fascinating*

That was supposed to end the post

He has described himself as socialist

...

Cinnamon

proofs?

...

Are there any other good live threads like this on leftypol? It was a trip getting to finally watching this perfectly executed since watching it on the iplayer meant for the video to pause and play again only by refreshing or waiting because of the vpn, or maybe my internet was just shit living in the shitty country I live but love.
The experience reminded me of the anecdote behind the release of Hitchcock's vertigo where a cult following went nuts by the film and tirelessly tried to get a bootlegged copy of it (obviously at the time there wasn't any home recording equipment so it was nearly impossible to see it after it was taken down from the film screens). It reminded me of that and also was pretty cool to feel like a character inside of William Gibson's book Pattern Recognition (obviously when I finally got around watching half of it where Gibson is mentioned I lost it, amazing stuff, the best one from AC imo), looking for clues in the previously released footage for the documentary.
Sadly I am not as well informed as the regular leftypoller or whatever you guys get called by pol but have been for a while lurking and picking a couple of books on zizek's influences some intro videos of marx's analysis etc. Im a beginner but invested in improving my knowledge on this field.
All of this to explain that I am also really interested in the artistic realisation of this doco, if anyone has any interesting texts or other examples of what might be associated with AC methods i would thank any other user pointing out said material, he has mentioned that John Dos Passos is a sort of foundational figure in his approach to documentary filmmaking. He also says that he is not an artist but a Journalist like a cool british Surkov would have put it.

For the uninitiated in Adam Curtis filmography I would recommend reading this article:

theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2016/oct/09/adam-curtis-donald-trump-documentary-hypernormalisation

Cheers everybody and good night

emilkirkegaard.dk/en/wp-content/uploads/Fashionable-Nonsense-Postmodern-Intellectuals-Abuse-of-Science-Alan-Sokal-Jean-Bricmont.pdf

Did you seriously just link Sokal? I'm not even gonna dignify this.

Defending post-modern? More like defending post-mortem.

Do you even know what that word means? Or what Baudrillard actually thought? Can you name me a single argument the man ever made? How about Derrida? How about Foucault? I highly doubt any of these, considering you've just linked "I don't understand metaphors: the novel." Sokal is an academic troll on a level none of "muh ebow postmudernz!" will never be. He deliberately misrepresents everyone. Sadly, he very nearly had a point with "Muh using scientific terms wrongly!"…Until one realizes why the thinkers used those terms and, oh wait for it, reads their fucking works.

we're getting it soon right?

yeah, i mean, wow…. just wow. i can't even….. I mean can you NOT?

23%
Going a lot faster than the download.

People would stop citing Sokal if worthless pomo fraudsters had a decent explanation for being grossly deceptive.

so roughly 30 minutes per 25% chunk. guess it'll be done in an hour and a half.

p i c k o n e

Where is Sokal deceptive? Please point to a location in the text.

All this faggot ever does is obfuscate shit into spookiness. It's like a fucking Ancient Aliens doc.

Cant watch outside the UK.

hopefully proxy is fast enough.

The entire book. Literally, that is the entire point of the book. He didn't comprehend what other people were saying, trolled his way into a shitty journal [as if this has never happened in muh natural sciences], then wrote a book to get money off stemfags for validating their preconceived autism.

It was nothing more than an act of pure posturing to further a career, and the irony if it is, once one reads one of his actual physics papers where he's doing something useful for a change, if you don't get physics, that shit is utterly incomprehensible and you can lob the same shitflinging toward him that he did toward "the postmodernists" [which is a bullshit term].

It was just a posturing attempt, that is all - same with Dick Dorkins, same with Sam "I forgot where my pecker is" Harris, same with most of these people when they're not sticking to their own goddamn field, as if they actually comprehend anybody else's. I'd recommend if you wanna actually critique somebody like Baudrillard, read his books, and stop masturbating.

There is a low quality version around on piratebay, and there is an HD copy being uploaded to mega.

986228

You need to link the segments within the challenge the doc presents I'm tired to elaborate this late at night but AC openly states that he uses propagandist techniques. Lets not forget that montage/film language was developed in the Russia of the 1920's to spread the good word for communism ising only moving images contrasted with each other through a carefuly constructed sries of secuences which generates meaning.

I don't know how to use the pirate bay.

Are you fucking five or 50? Just use deluge (if on windows), click the magnet link and open it. Shit's a torrent. Not complicated.

Nope mate I'm 25 but I'm scared of destroying my shitposting machine.

Any how-to torrent guide on google will help your pirate intentions

I'd highly recommend getting a VPN, and dear God do not use utorrent - qbtorrent if you're on Windows pls

Nothing is going to happen to it. Deluge is free software (free as in freedom). It's a bittorrent client. Use your browser to look up the torrent, then click the magnet link, when it asks you, open it with deluge, specify the download folder and let it download. Make sure to seed.

I also recommend not using windows if you can avoid it.

deluge-torrent.org/

Also, I'd recommend PIA as a VPN. They don't record your activity, and it comes with a free proxy m8.

The Courtier's Response. Sokal deals with your bullshit claim in the introduction. Turn to page 9 and start reading at: "2: You don't understand the context.".

What is your problem with Dawkins and Sam Harris?

I've read the damn book. He doesn't deal with shit. Also, literally everything that isn't The Selfish Gene. Dawkins is a fucking retard.

No, I mean what specific problems do you have with Dawkins or Harris. You can't just say Dawkins is a retard, because he is clearly not, so point out his actual mistakes or shut up.

Well, this depends on how you view it. Personally, I think Dawkins has a very specialized subset of knowledge specifically in biology and zoology [which is why I exempt The Selfish Gene]. Harris is just all over the goddamn place, but I'll try to list them off as I go.

Dawkins:
Uses argumentum ad absurdum to "refute" 'muh ebow pomos'
Has suggested we create a fucking rape scale ranging from "bad sex" to "actual rape"
Constantly says fucked up shit, then wonders publicly why "muh PC brigade" just shits all over him
Has continuously shown a lack of knowledge about how anything outside of his own field works [see: anything he says about foreign policy, religion, philosophy, etc.]
Makes exuberant, borderline-theological proclamations about "muh beautiful nature"

Sam Harris:
Thinks ethics should be derived from studying the human brain
Has suggested creating a fucking pill to produce all the effects of torture without having to "actually" torture someone [see: The Moral Landscape]
Generally ignorant about the limitations of his own field, tbh.

That's my short list. I don't object to their scientific research, I find that quite laudable [as I do with Sokal]. What I object to, predominately, is their rather boring lack of comprehension about fields outside of their own. They're quite easy to respond to when they enter dialogues with other fields, and that's my issue - they think they are absolute intellectual authorities on everything because of their ravenous following. Hopefully that suffices as an answer, end response.

...

If this is meant a response to me, I never said I agreed with those laws fam.

Yes, he does. He deals with your empty little accusation right there, in that paragraph. Perhaps you should restrict yourself to expressing opinions on Shakespeare.

No, he doesn't. Again, I've read the fucking book, introduction included.

Also
Noooow I get it tbh

Do you agree with the following maxim: "Forcible rape is an oxymoron"?

If not, you're no different from the people pushing those laws.

Ack, I meant NONforcible rape.

...

Of course I agree that "nonforcible rape" is an oxymoron. If you're raping someone, it is inherently against their consent, no objection here. I also disagree with Dawkins trying to put it on bullshit scales, tho. I don't see how that's a contradictory position to hold.

You win the thread tbh

2/2

just posting dawkins stuff

Yes, he does. Anyone who wants to read the text can go and see for themselves that you are wrong.
You've also completely ignored it's contents because it triggered you, it seems.

Nothing wrong with liking Shakespeare. It will not matter if you spout utter crap about it, either.

You are great

I haven't ignored it. I've read the book. That is why I'm not gonna entertain it. Sokal is an academic troll, and you're a fucking nutter if you got through that shit and bought into it.

I can see you're definitely here for very good and reasonable discussion mhm.

What is PIA?

He didn't actually say that, and you know it. He just said some rapes are worse than others.
When you have "atheists" defending Islam, there is a problem.
I disagree with many of his opinions, but that doesn't make him retarded.
He really likes his work. I don't see anything wrong with that.

Again, he did not say that. He said certain ethical questions are better answered if we have more information, such as the killing of animals, or other such things.
He said torture should be illegal, and that if it had to be done, it is best to do it in a way that limits harm. He has never once suggested that this be a common thing.
Most people are, but other viewpoints are useful.

The "academic trolls" are the people Sokal is responding to. Sokal quite specifically points out examples of those people bullshitting

Hardly my fault that you respond to the exposition of the dishonesty of your postmodern idols like a Scientologist handed a tract on Xenu. The situation precludes you finding the discussion "reasonable".

Isn't his point that the authors he is criticising are using language that is more complex than is necessary? That in a physics paper the specialist language is used to simplify the conveyance of complex ideas, but that the criticised authors were using needlessly convoluted language to make simple ideas seem complex?

how far has the upload gone, user? It should be around 75% by now right?

If you can show me a paper that ridiculous in a scientific journal, I'll concede the point. Publishing something you can't understand just because it sounds nice is exactly why the social sciences are not real science.

Close, 78%.

based user

You are a hero :)

Yeah this is really great lets hope it turns onto a tradition or something like that

Watching this and there is a scene where two people were shot during the fall of the soviet union. Can anyone tell me who the footage of was?

Alright, comrades. She is done.

mega.nz/#!RUN2mZyb!NlzOU7nseHyTE9ClghCrPu_UUDldLOSa-2TSuK2onkg

Please do me a favor and spread this around more if you can, like on torrents and usenet.

The Selfish Meme

This.

Thread song right here:
youtube.com/watch?v=ckBlXtYrpy0

Thank you based user. I suspect that this is the highest-quality copy of the video currently available.

Yes. This is in 720p. Screenshot ITT.

fucking sweet. the biggest one on tpb was 940x546.

confirmed! watching it this way is probably even better than straight off the website, due to their laggy flash shit and auto-adjusting quality.

thank you based user. everyone should watch this copy instead of the piratebay ones if they have the choice.

found a short subdocumentary that appends to hypernormalization made by Adam Curtis for the young cool hipster rebels at vice, really good intro:

vice.com/read/adam-curtis-living-unreal-world-short-film

the video seems to be broken or something.

ultimately the hypernormalization documentary is void of any real substance but looking at bbc stock footage with edm in the background was cool. this dude sums it up perfectly youtube.com/watch?v=x1bX3F7uTrg

What the fuck are you looking for in a documentary?

I have no fucking clue what his detractors seem to interpret beyond his technique, they know shit about documentary production and even less about the intersection between visual propaganda (montage -finely executed beyond belief in Hypernormalisation on the hollywood of the 90's thats trying to make a new comeback), critique/subject exposure and art. Its so disappointing to read that kind of bullshit "counter argumentation" (without any argument actually expressed in those rather scant observations) and the worst of all is that it comes from progressive spaces such as this one.
I wonder if it connects with Zizek's POV on the role of the poet as a dictatorship enabler.

wow

Postmodernism is stupid, sure, but Sokal was still being a retard by implying that science is literally the only source of useful truth. People mistook his babbling for something that was not meant to contradict scientific fact to begin with.

So postmodernism should not be subservient to science?

So postmodernism should be subservient to science?

That's not how philosophy works, retard.

No, seriously. Either postmodernism can make correct claims that contradict science or science can make correct claims that contradict postmodernism.

champion

BY MAKING THAT PROPOSITION YOU ARE DOING PHILOSOPHY YOU FUCKING TWO BIT IGNORANT MORON! FUCKING LEARN SOMETHING BEFORE YOU OPEN YOUR MOUTH YOU MONGOLOID CUNT! PHILOSOPHERS INVENTED THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD FOR FUCK'S SAKE.

Honestly, could you be anymore of a pseudo-intellectual embarrassment? Go read some Parmenides you two dollar fuckwit.

I like Adam Curtis. His documentaries prove without a doubt that capitalism is a disaster that only enriches the powerful and that the Marxist economic model is the only way to fix it.

Wow, postmodernism REALLY IS just religion for faggots.

Pure ideology

Adam Curtis has really started reading Baudrillard, apparently:
youtube.com/watch?v=XdDMFNFMByU

From his early works on consumption replacing production, to his middle works on politics becoming its own simulation and the system absorbing all opposition, to his later works on being held hostage of such a system and the possibility and impossibility of breaking away from it… It's almost all there, although in a very watered down version.

This is probably the best short presentation for normies of why Baudrillard is important to read and is not a "postmodernist" - as the supporters of this fake system (the real postmodernists whom he attacks) have tried to label him.

Just watched it and really enjoyed it. Besides the politics it had a great soundtrack. Thanks OP.

he also touches on mongs like you with those sorts of attitudes, and you seem pretty sensitive so yeah, don't watch it.

Question for post-modernists: are you embarrassed by this poster, or do you think he is doing a good job of defending your ideas?

He is doing an amazing job, in order to focus on Hypernormalization I would wish the exchange didn't take place though but still I learned a thing or two from it. Also, what happened to civility? The return of vulgarity is disgusting

Then I think I'll never see eye to with post-modernists. I don't have a horse in the race either way, I just can't stand how he's arguing. it's all salt and no substance. he's asked for examples and he can't even give one.

Please don't be upset: my take on the whole dialogue both engaged in is that one of the two didn't even consider for a moment that the other side could be "right". So you stopped listening to the core of his argumentation and the name calling well it made it just impossible to share a middle ground between the two.
And as you say I don't have a horse in the race either way while being more on the "side" of the so-called po-mo which by the looks on a general glance on the exchange seemed to mean many things.

Social media destroyed it. It's a cancer in society.

denk you

Youtube link when? Mega is fucking dogshit.

youtube.com/watch?v=zFtsrjlsclQ

I was really disappointed actually. I was expecting something like this short one from Curtis:
Instead we got too much emphasis on international relations that, as we are told right at the beginning, are a spectacle where you can't possibly know what's real. Right after that point Curtis should move to showing how we are all part of this hegemonic system even when we oppose it, how we have all become hostages of this through liberal ideology, and why we're incapable of resisting. He only briefly touched on this, without going into details about how this has come to be and how it's organized. He had a chance here to go to the core of our world and shatter the minds of his viewers. Instead we got just another conspiracy theory about conspiracy theories, that the system can manage like the rest of them.

What I really like though was that he said Occupy Wallstreet was just another idea about management. Because when people on the street use the same metaphors of networks as the rich people in the offices above them… Then you know there's nothing imaginative about it.

But this was an illusion…

Yeah it felt like he could have taken it somewhere else, I did feel slightly disappointed how it sort of skimmed across.
Which sounds incredibly harsh, it was still pretty fuckin great.

kek

disturbingly accurate

This.
Who were those guys being shot?

who are the real postmodernists?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trial_of_Nicolae_and_Elena_Ceaușescu

tl;dr the Communist dictator of Romania and his wife

what did you learn?

I learned or well connected the whole thing to one of the concepts Zizek keeps talking from Hegel, obviously, about how in retrospect history makes sense but in the moment is chaotic and how a sense out of that story can shape the future, something like that

Today pretty much everybody, including everybody here ("I'm more marxist than you", "I'm not marxist-leninist anymore, this week I've decided to become anarcho-communist", "my flag is cooler than yours").
Even terrorists have become somewhat postmodernist now, just look at their promotional videos.

I don't get it. Is changing your mind postmodern?

There's a torrent for this?
Can't download on mega, limited bandwidth.

I don't get it. Is changing your mind postmodern?

What do you mean by 'postmodernist' here? People changing their minds? People using video cameras?
Postmodernism is usually described as the premise that:
a) Difference is the most basic principle of life
b) Because of this, all 'norms' should be rejected b/c they can't capture the infinite difference of human experience
Saying "I'm more Marxist than you" still accepts universality as a useful political idea. Da'esh don't really hate homogeneity either,

youtube.com/watch?v=D5A4n7i5rmE

there's a couple lower-quality torrents on tpb, and there's youtubes of it now.

constantly

I want to elaborate on this. Learning and connecting its so fucking different from having an epiphany its more of a rythm that plays in your head realisation through realisation, you can't just assign a revelation and unfold a beautiful mystery -when it involves others who care, its like picking up a shared dialogue at different time zones. Its hard but beautiful. A theophany through the pleasure of an all encompassing love.

This is the type of shit that makes me want to give up and become a cult leader.
I'd get cute bitches, and maybe I can get everyone to follow me toward communism while being worshiped as a God. There's already my weird hippy friends who think I'm psychic.
It might work

Like a scientologist

Or Rodyakin

Reminder that Curtis ripped off Issac Cronin's Call it Sleep & Craig Baldwin's works

youtube.com/watch?v=JeSx0g-PnaE

interesting video, I'm curious where you found it. that said, Adam Curtis is clearly way better at editing, narration, and storytelling. I'd say it's likely he never watched the vid you linked.

Thanks for this.

Having watched the whole thing, I have to say his Syria analysis is extremely lacking. I'm kind of surprised that he, after making an entire documentary about the way Neoconservatives invented Al Qaeda (Power of Nightmares), is ignoring Western support for Al Qaeda offshoots today.

That's because "western support for ISIS", while not wholly untrue from a certain point of view, is a gross exaggeration. We have been supporting various rebel groups and regional governments in an effort to pressure Assad and undermine Iran. The problem is the distinction between those groups and ISIS is a very thin, blurry, porous one; and that our halfhearted support for the few groups that really are ideologically secular has caused their membership to falter, and be wooed by their enemies.

Granted, in 15 years, this will probably end up about like the Taliban, with numerous figures we supported outside ISIS, later firmly embedded within the worst groups, but we most certainly aren't directly giving material, funds, or assistance to ISIS today.

Thanks for correcting the record!

Where did I ever mention western support for ISIS? I said the west supports Al Qaeda offshoots, and this is undeniable. The west has been supporting Al Nusra, Ahrar al Sham, Al Zenki, and so on. The CIA has been supporting these groups, NATO has been supporting them, and the peninsular Arab states have been supporting them. They're part of an Al Qaeda rebranding effort, and it works: they now have the support of the USA as long as they just kill Syrians and don't launch overseas attacks.

ISIS is unique among these groups in that it has the support of Turkey, Qatar, Saudi, UAE, etc. but NOT the west (usually). The reason is that ISIS still takes a hardline approach on overseas terrorism, and they broadcast propaganda videos exposing their brutal acts. The USA was extremely reluctant to intervene against them, but the dead American journalists and the widely broadcast genocide against the Yazidis forced them to denounce ISIS and start attacking them. That said, the US airforce recently conducted a bombing raid against the Syrian army, killing nearly a hundred soldiers, in an act that can only be described as giving air support to ISIS. We bombed the SAA, and ISIS, who they had been fighting, moved in and claimed the territory. As well, ISIS was being given free reign to sell their oil on Turkish blackmarkets by the USA until Russia moved in and started bombing their oil convoys, making the USA look bad.

you can tell a lot of the anti-german/russian stuff in this is cold war scare pseudo-intellectual bullshit

Where is this Black Market whgre you can buy oil cheap? Does it have a sign saying Black Market?

Alright, that's a fair enough assessment. I just assumed you were a Holla Forumsack spouting some derivative of the "ISIS is ZOG Occupied Government!1!" bunk.

I'm of the personal opinion the "get all parties talking" approach commonly recommended for Israel would actually work for Syria, especially months ago closer to the outbreak of hostilities. Every moment Syria is a warzone, and various military forces are allowed to openly brutalize the population, the entire country becomes more barbaric and less likely to ever return to normal, much less curtail Assad's autocratic rule.

It's surprisingly common. In a lot of 3rd-world petronations, a common problem with poorly guarded pipelines is people tapping out of them and selling it to illegal refineries:
havocscope.com/tag/oil-theft/

Meh to both of you. The IS belongs under the rebranding of AQ (it's the primary rebranding, AlNusra isn't) (just compare headlines from 10 years ago to now - IS was what replaced it).

Israel covertly being ok or directly supporting all of the shit in their region is old news (the whole 'arabs fighting arabs good for us' meme), it's not just SA, Turkey, US, etc.

Saying this obvious shit doesn't make you a Holla Forumsack (and cute trying to conflate that, with 'ZOG occupied government' and the obvious straying into nazi territory, in which these basic things do not belong)

The view of the empire supporting IS and these groups is not an exaggeration. The goal is conflict, military profiteering and destabilization - as it has been for 30 odd years. Same exact shit AQ played.

Get all parties talking only works when the primary agent actually wants it to stop. What have has the empire been trying to do for the past, what is it now, 5 years? Use every possible angle, to get people on board with bombing the shit out of Syria.

If anybody is wandering, it's on youtube

youtube.com/watch?v=zFtsrjlsclQ

If this documentary is true, why was it allowed to air?

why shouldn't it be?

...

Because it supposedly is exposing deep truths

And? I'm struggling to see your point.
Do you think everything you see in the MSM is a lie or something?

I'm just saying that I doubt the accuracy of a documentary that makes such anti establishment claims when its being broadcasted by the goddamn BBC

So in a sense you're saying you're a tinfoil hat moron?

Alright, having just finished watching, I think most of the documentary can pretty much be summed up as pic related for normalfags.

Wordfilter mang

Interesting watch as always, but Curtis seems to always further some liberal narrative in his conclusions or moral or whatever. Here he assumes the evils if Brexit and Russia, but doesn't do any digging into why these ideas exist as is sort of supposed to be the point of his movies.

It seems like he just decided to wrap it up after 150 minutes.
Would have been better to make it a two parter.

Kill yourself my man

this guy here.

The other elephant in the room that Adam Curtis seems to avoid is one of the biggest material forces behind the creation of this truth-free society, the collapse of journalism. We've seen, just in America alone, over twenty thousand journalism jobs permanently destroyed. Simultaneously, the PR field has ballooned. What's really weird about Curtis' avoidance of this topic is that journalism is dying because of the internet, one of the main topics of HyperNormalisation. The internet makes information post-scarcity, but this is incompatible with the capitalist wage system. Publications now depend on ad revenue for funding. The most important types of journalism (investigative) take the most time and money, with possibly the least reward in terms of pageviews. As well, journalists become dependent on political access in order to get scoops and leaks. The end result is a market-driven dissident purge. Adam Curtis also avoids mentioning the flipside of Trump's lies, which is Hillary's lies, and her complete domination and control of the media. In the end, this actually ties in with his negligence on the Syria issue: one of the biggest disgraces of modern reporting is the total fiction that the western media is trying to sell to people about the Syrian conflict.

bostonglobe.com/opinion/2016/02/18/the-media-are-misleading-public-syria/8YB75otYirPzUCnlwaVtcK/story.html

key from that article:
>Under intense financial pressure, most American newspapers, magazines, and broadcast networks have drastically reduced their corps of foreign correspondents. Much important news about the world now comes from reporters based in Washington. In that environment, access and credibility depend on acceptance of official paradigms. Reporters who cover Syria check with the Pentagon, the State Department, the White House, and think tank “experts.” After a spin on that soiled carousel, they feel they have covered all sides of the story. This form of stenography produces the pabulum that passes for news about Syria.

Curtis pls

Very good documentary. Much better than Bitter Lake. I agree with .
The narrative is great, but I think he is too fast when talking about today ocurrences.

And here's the other article those images are from:
washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/04/23/why-the-pr-industry-is-sucking-up-pulitzer-winners/

Absolutely terrifying stuff.

thanks

That's just the neo-con/hawk line to justify further American intervention in Syria, and handwave away any concerns about the dominance of Islamist groups among the anti-government forces

They're the same blinkered stab-in-the-back fuckwits that were constantly arguing we just needed one more surge in Iraq/Afghanistan to solve everything

Full doc on youtube.

youtube.com/watch?v=04iWYEoW-JQ

thanks

I haven't watched it yet, but I did see the trailer. What it implies with the words "we know" and "they know we know, they don't care" might be relevant to your post.

Guise, where can I get some clean news? The only shit I, or pretty much anyone knows, has been passed through the private and government filtration systems.

tbh I just follow a bunch of lefties on twitter.

Do they source their shit?

What's wrong with Sokal?

Get out hyper-normalfags
Reeeee

The only problem I have with Curtis is that his Right-leaning Libertarian politics often shine through in his "We're all fucked, there is nothing we can do" attitude. These documentaries, while absolutely smashing the ruling elite, basically all have this super nihilist edgy attitude of we are all fucked no matter what we do.

That being said, it's pretty hilarious that a right winger is one of my favourite documentary makers.

I just finished the movie. It's over-hyped. I don't know what else to say except that I used to be a regular in the dubtrack room, but it just became too unpleasant. the room has next to nothing to do with leftypol, I think it's mostly run by Holla Forums users who want to troll leftists. I don't know why we allow this thread. One of the regulars in the room is named pepezefrog. no suprise, he identifies with pepe, but the anti-social edgy kind. always tries to act like a toughguy, it's kind of sad the extent of his delusion. now he might be a Holla Forumstard, but what's worse is that he's a literal cuckold. I don't mean that as an insult, everyone has kinks, but he's always bringing it up. One time there was EXTREMELY light banter going on, and he just loses it and flies off the handle: 'cuck this, cuck that', he starts rattling off the elaborate fantasies he has about 'chad' and jocks in highschool. I'm guessing he thinks the absurd spiel he is giving feels damaging, because that's what he's vulnerable to, but all of us are just confused. every day he says something about cuckolding, and it is never related to the discussion. just out of no where "cuck, cuck, cuck" we were all telling him to calm down, but he didn't wouldn't going. eventually I guess he realized how much he was embarressing himself, and his cuck insults weren't having the desired effect, so he ragequit, but the whole situation left a bad taste in my mouth. I hardly go there anymore.

The one thing I find hilarious about this documentary.

It's history on Qaddafi and how the US and UK framed him for fucking everything especially Lockerbie when it was always blatantly Syria and Iran behind these attacks.

What makes it even more hilarious was I was called a "nutter conspiracy theorist" on boards for years and years pointing this out that Qaddafi was largely a eccentric fucking nobody who never did shit was was just framed for everything.

Then Libya happened and Qaddafi was murdered.

Suddenly out of western media "New information on Lockerbie, Syria and Iran behind it", "intelligence says, Syria and Iran were really behind Lockerbie", "Evidence now points that Syria and Iran were behind Lockerbie"

What fucking pieces of shit. For years I had pointed this out and been mocked all over the internet, now it's such fucking fact, it's in a hugely hyped BBC documentary.

The only reason it's now fact? Because Libya lies in ruins much of it controlled by Islamic State while Syria is now the target the US finally wants to stick the boot into.

Clinton and Sarkozy should be in jail for what they did in Syria (literally broke international law)

My bad for what Sarkozy and Clinton did in Libya

they link to a lot of heavily-researched stuff. the state of the media is so bad these days that you can literally expose their lies just by pointing to other reports they made.

I watched it. It's shit. Full of bullshit no one cares about the middle east and it implies OWS failed because it had no goals instead of police crackdowns.

No, it implied OWS failed because it was infested with too many braindead hipsters screeching at phantoms, as a narcissistic act of virtue-signalling to make themselves feel better. Which is dead accurate.

That scene where Qadaffi was finally allowed on western TV and he could finally speak to a big audience about his "third universal theory" was genuinely hilarious. Qadaffi was portrayed as you say, as some crazy nut that mismanaged his country, who could act as an international pushover.
Kind of makes you feel bad that he had to die that way. Not really though.
We need a "Third Universal Theory" flag.

How can you both be this close and still misunderstand him?
He literally boiled it down to the fact that it was a protest where the only thing the protesters could agree on was a new system of management and communication than any actual political change.
You can disagree with whether that's what actually happened (Which it would appear we all three do), but that is quite literally what he fucking says in the documentary.
Nothing about lacking goals, and nothing about fucking "virtue signaling" or idpol at all lol.

He's presenting a Marxian critique but he never once uses the word "capitalism." Why?

The FBI played a big part in the fall of OWS.

...

Come to the dark side, user. Right wing death squads. It is in your blood.

No you couldn't, you fucking retard. The point is that their jargon is so meaningless that they cannot tell the difference between earnest writing and fake.

I'm trying to cultivate a feed like that on twitter myself, could you type out some of the people that you follow, it would be appreciated.

Just doing some research and stumbled on this, SJWs disrupting OWS and laughing at a class conscious white guy until he shuts up
youtube.com/watch?v=SCwhlZtHhWs
Think it's worthy of being .webm'd. We really need some anti-idpol propaganda. Maybe if one of the youtubefags is about they could do a video or series on it.

...

I think people are overanalyzing what is a lot simpler, and frankly more pathetic, than it sounds, and serves as a stark reminder of why liberals are no more similar to us than full on rightcucks.

All these kids saw in OWS was an excuse to further do nothing with the spoiled, entitled lives their boomer parents drilled into their heads and whine loudly about how reality won't bend to their whim. They have never cared about civil rights.

you do not need all this torrent bullshit, comrades!!! filmsforaction.org/watch/hypernormalisation-2016/

...

can someone tell me the tune playing when the ceaucescu's get executed?

It's shit. Nihilistic shit. Never once does he use the word "capitalism." It's also threaded in a very strange way. Plus it's too fucking long and repetitive.

Have you seen his other work?

I was going to report your bully post at the speed of light, but then I thought that the speed of light being so fast would make me a sexist.

- politicians have always been tricksters
- politicians never had any real ability to make huge changes, and were just the dominant ideology of their time
- social media only reflects what already exists and his suggestion is technological determinism - come on we all know life is curated to some degree
- if we really did live beyond reality, we woudn;t even be able to know it or discuss it
-society is changing and getteing better, 1.1 step forward 1 step back.

tl;dr
- the film is defeatist Weberian shit

I've only seen All Watched Over By Machines of Loving Grace and The Century of the Self.

TOPKEK
Chapo Trap House makes an actually good Adam Curtis parody (it's the intro).
soundcloud.com/chapo-trap-house/episode-52-dirty-wars-2-rise-of-mcraven-feat-jeremy-scahill-102316