I cant help but kind of laugh at how much negativity this video has stirred up!
What part makes you think of conspiracy theory exactly? There's a lot of material that i can understand as such, but im just curious.
I don't get what's so repellent about trying to assess the fact that we have a certain amount of resources on this planet, and that it's logical to try and use them as efficiently and ecologically as possible, so that when the time comes when we need it, we're not sitting around thinking "Oh geeeeeee, we should have thought about this the first time around." The way this Peter Joseph proposes how we'd approach the globe, knowing everything we know up to this point, and how we'd inhabit the planet differently than how we do now.
What is so unfathomable about looking at nurture vs nature regarding violence and what drives people toward committing crimes? If it's thought that we were a non-violent species when equality is upheld, I don't think it's completely unrealistic to entertain the reasons they think we act the way we do.
Having neither the desire nor time to do the riff on the whole of this two hour hunk of junk, I am going to do my best to boil it down to salient features that I think render this production worthless:
1) It twists towards its premise, presents selective evidence (where it bothers to present evidence at all) and generally just tries to tell you: 'this is the way the world is because we say so, take our word for it'.
2) It outright lies (or is really that clueless) and pretends that modern economic theory is identical to Locke and Smith.
3) It oversimplifies real problems and spreads misinformation. E.g. the whopper about lack of money being the sole reason AIDS isn't cured and treated in Africa (not only ignoring the crisis of HIV in wealthy nations, but also vastly understating the problems afforded by the behaviour of individual people following localised rules to form a staggeringly, dauntingly complex system). Moreover it tries to (absurdly) tie all problems to one source.
4) It solely presents solutions palatable to its political bent while excluding alternatives that remain valid even under its schema. e.g. eugenics, nuclear power, population limits, etc. Thus presenting you with the concept of 'our way' or 'the evil system'. Thus using the very concept of false dichotomy that it explicitly calls a tool of manipulation.
5) It engages in a patronising tone and relies on dismissal and mockery rather than argument. Yet another thing that it itself points out as a fallacy and a tool of manipulation.
6) It provides little to no actual evidence for any of its claims, and warns against trusting the establishment and experts (cause they are after all, controlled by the system). It purports to have stumbled upon things that experts 'don't know' or 'don't realise' or are 'afraid to admit'. Also the idea that we academics are in it for the glitz and the money is one of the most hilarious pieces of garbage I have ever heard <_<
7) It serves as a soapbox for people complaining that the establishment has marginalised them for their radical ideas, instead of admitting that they just don't know what they are talking about.
In short, it follows the exact same deplorable techniques used by anti-vaxers and 'intelligent design' advocates. While it looks at many genuine problems it tries to claim an oversimplification of these problems and an exclusivity on (a single) solution. A solution that is conveniently completely untenable, but exists to serve as a rallying cry for self-pity, victim think, and wishes that the world were different. A solution that conveniently requires that people who want it don't have to actually go and try to make the world a better place, but instead get to just feel like victims of the big boogie man of 'the system'.
It trivialises real problems, advocates fantasy solutions, pushes bad science, and belittles those of us who actually try to work to make the world a better place. As a result I feel that its goal is to actually discourage
people from taking any kind of action other than giving vocal support to its political view. It is a feel good puff piece for people who are depressed about the world, but are too lazy/incapable/unwilling to take real steps. I would put it on the same level as Fox news and do not think it suitable for any kind of serious consideration.