Notices
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Micheal Moore's Capitalism: A Love Story

  1. #1 Micheal Moore's Capitalism: A Love Story 
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,035
    I've only seen previews so far, because the movie doesn't come out until Friday, but it seems like some of the things he's criticizing are components of Fascism, not Capitalism.

    His "Citizen's Arrest" of the AIG executives, for example. AIG using government money to pay bonuses to its executives in a failing economy is something we would more likely expect to see in a Fascist state rather than a capitalist state. (In a capitalist state there would be no government money. We'd just let the company go under).

    Now, maybe I'm misunderstanding Fascism. My understanding of Fascism (the economic part) is that it differs from socialism in that the government still runs most of the economy, but uses private corporations as its administrators. (Like hiring KBR to provide meals to soldiers in Iraq, rather than leaving that as an internal function of the military.) In a sense, any business that provides people with jobs would be seen as carrying out a government function, and therefore eligible for government assistance whenever it needs it.

    Am I wrong about all these definitions?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,847
    I saw an interview, with Wolf Blitzer, in which Moore (along with politely but more or less openly treating Wolf as the hack he is) made it clear that he made the film about *capitalism as we know it, what we call capitalism in practice* (approximate quotes) rather than theoretical capitalism.

    He could hardly do otherwise, and be understood.

    Quote Originally Posted by kojax
    My understanding of Fascism (the economic part) is that it differs from socialism in that the government still runs most of the economy, but uses private corporations as its administrators.
    Most people would put it the other way around, in practice for sure and in theory probably. But the conjoinment - the support of corporate organization by state power, and vice versa - is the basic arrangement.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Professor Wild Cobra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,140
    Moore is a sleazy piece of <censored>. He's just a political hack that will twist the truth without remorse.

    Any who saw his Fahrenheit 911 should also watch Fahrenhype 911. They have some people in there that tell the real story that Moore twisted. The High School principle, the soldier who lost his limbs, the Oregon State patrol man, and more.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,035
    Quote Originally Posted by Wild Cobra
    Moore is a sleazy piece of <censored>. He's just a political hack that will twist the truth without remorse.

    Any who saw his Fahrenheit 911 should also watch Fahrenhype 911. They have some people in there that tell the real story that Moore twisted. The High School principle, the soldier who lost his limbs, the Oregon State patrol man, and more.
    What do you mean about the soldier that lost his limbs? That scene is the only thing I really took out of the whole movie. Was there something scandalous about it? I'm talking about the one that just flashes by for a moment.

    Quote Originally Posted by iceaura
    I saw an interview, with Wolf Blitzer, in which Moore (along with politely but more or less openly treating Wolf as the hack he is) made it clear that he made the film about *capitalism as we know it, what we call capitalism in practice* (approximate quotes) rather than theoretical capitalism.

    He could hardly do otherwise, and be understood.
    Good point. Can't drop the "F" bomb these days. (Fascism), everyone immediately points out that we haven't started rounding up Jews, and assumes therefore that it is not possible we could be repeating any of Germany's mistakes.


    Quote Originally Posted by kojax
    My understanding of Fascism (the economic part) is that it differs from socialism in that the government still runs most of the economy, but uses private corporations as its administrators.
    Most people would put it the other way around, in practice for sure and in theory probably. But the conjoinment - the support of corporate organization by state power, and vice versa - is the basic arrangement.

    At the very least, the corporations are required to uphold a pretense of not being in charge.

    There's an interesting book I read once about the last king of Ethiopia called "The Emperor", by Kapuscinski, . It's not technically about a fascist state, just a very corrupt dictatorship, but I think most of it is relevant to this. It's basically a documentary where the author went around and interviewed people who had been part of the regime. It's interesting because you get the sense that King Haile Selassie's administrators basically owned him, in a lot of ways. How well they did their job determined how well he could hold power, and avoid assassination, because the people would see it as reflecting on his leadership. So, what he did to ensure their loyalty was he basically allowed them to embezzle however much they wanted from their respective administrations' budgets, as long as the job still got done. (Sound familiar? Take the budgeted funds, get the job done cheaper, ... keep the difference as profit?)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    30
    I've never had anything against Moore in the past but after seeing interviews with him...I mean the guys not the brightest guy in the world, frankly he seems kinda stupid and he's got enough ego to compare with Kanye West. After seeing what he's really like it's hard to take any of his documentaries seriously.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard spuriousmonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,191
    Anyone who can manage to make several movies in a row that do well at the box office isn't stupid. Especially if they don't even contain angelina Jolie's tits or explosions.

    You are probably confused and you equal differing in opinion as stupid, where notions that clash with your opinion are classified automatically as stupid.
    "Kill them all and let God sort them out."

    - Arnaud Amalric

    http://spuriousforums.com/index.php
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard i_feel_tiredsleepy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    2,256
    His books are fairly informative too, and he provides ample references. His style of mixing comedy with didactic social commentary is quite engaging, whether you agree with him or not.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •