Motley Moose – Archive

Since 2008 – Progress Through Politics

"Capitalism: A Love Story"

I was wondering where I was going to put this tube. It seems appropriate here.

Why appropriate? Just a new movie called “Capitalism: A Love Story” by Michael Moore, set to release October 2, 2009. Here is a snippet.

Jesus. Does Michael want us to have armed rebellion against the wealthy? Hmmmmm. Perhaps we could sic the birther/anti-healthcare/teabagging nuts on Wall Steet…

More on the economy:

I do not know why I am so in love with Versusplus. I think they are a bunch of musically talented economists, with a lefty political bend. Send them money or something, so they can do more stuff. That is an order.

As you can imagine, fox is not happy with Mr. Moore.

Goodness, why in the heck didn’t we elect Tom Tancredo for President? These are the great minds of the GOP;~o

I think Michael Moore should get the last word.

Word!!!

I came across a couple of reviews of the film that I thought I would share. Enjoy.

Jeez, I can’t even let Michael Moore have the last word;~J


Categories: Uncategorized.

/ 164 Comments

164 comments

  2. Hollede

    I (unfortunately) must go to town and bring Ani her phone that she forgot this morning. I swear she does this on purpose, in an effort to get me out of the house:~( I know she does it out of love though…

  3. Chris Blask

    but Michael Moore gives me hives.

    I actually had to fast-forward through most of his bit on the Colbert Report after the first minute or two – he didn’t seem to catch on to the fact that Colbert is playing a part and started sneering at him as if he actually meant everything he said.  I really wanted to hear what he had to say but it was just too painful to listen to him.

    I’m sorry, but Moore is pablum for people who already agree with whatever he is saying and kryptonite to everyone else.  Listening to a multi-millionaire complain about capitalism is a new level of weirdness in Hollywood.  In Bizarro World Michael Moore is the host of the Glenn Beck show.

  4. alyssa chaos

    the above thread is interesting. [!]

    I must say that I dig Michael Moore. He goes there when others dont even dare to touch it, [criticizing capitalism? jeepers, isn’t that unamerican?] and he gets his not so popular message out to a massive amount of people.

    tom tancredo. ewwww.

  6. Jjc2008

    I must say hearing some compare Michael Moore to Limbaugh or Beck gives me hives.  

    Don’t recall ever hearing Moore use racism as a populist tool to bring someone down.  Don’t recall Moore ever promoting violence against individuals.  

    He is pro union.  But then so am I.   I think we need unions now more than ever.  The corporatists have the upper hand; they own much of the media which makes it difficult for true populists to get heard.  Moore p*sses them off because he has made money off the truth and then turns it into more truth.

    I am an unabashed left wing liberal.  The word liberal neither embarrasses me nor upsets me.  Hell socialism does not bother me. I simply understand that there is no one system that can work on a larger scale.   A convent or monastery can be totally socialist or communist and work well.  But few governments can function that way because unlike a monastery the people have not really dedicated themselves to a way of life.  

    I believe the best governments function with a combination.   Big corporations can be kept in balance with a strong worker’s union. I believe greed can only be kept in control with strong regulatory laws.  I believe certains sections of society function better without a profit motive: health, education, community services (in other words those things known as the common good).

    I don’t know Moore personally but I do believe this.  Limbaugh is a hateful greedy, jerk who espouses the “white man’s privilege” and has made millions using fear mongering and lies to convince many that the old system that denied women and/or minorities the same rights as white males was the best system.   Moore is exposing the powerful who use money and privilege to keep the status quo.  

    Implying they are different sides of the same coin give me hives.

  7. Shaun Appleby

    What a cracker diary.  Bet you never guessed you would start a brushfire here at the collegial Moose, eh?

    Good for you.

  8. Peter Jukes

    Came late to this Parade (blame Poland) and missed the barrage of graphs and graphics and co-efficients in live action. Shame. I could have made a fool of myself and taken sides. Instead now, all I can do is be pompous and summarise, like some arch arcane American Pop Idol judge.

    Chris, – loved your combative take on Moore and you’re willingness to praise jackals on a Moose blog (only joshing ya). I’m glad Moore exists, but when I saw him talk in London he did speak utter tripe. He said something like ‘It’s wrong whenever American troops leave the country’. I tried to put up my hand and mention ‘D-Day’ but the peace loving isolationists loved the de rigeur simplistic rant. He’s a populist and a bit of a demagogue. But I suppose the more partisan of us would agree; at least he’s our populist demagogue.

    So Hollede and JJc – I’m having my cake and eating it. I’m on your side too. That’s true too with economics…

    John – you’re so right. Capitalism is such a catch-all that it’s now become a floating signifier for either ‘good’ or ‘bad’ according to your preferences (a bit like ‘socialism’). Oddly enough, while the latter is always a live rail in the states, the former can be in some countries in Europe. To them, it doesn’t mean freedom or choice, but rich pre war ‘Capitalists’ with top hats and monocles. Primitive capitalism, high capitalism, flexible capitalism – there are so many variations on this theme but surely ‘accumulation of capital power’ is one of the underlying principles that separates ‘capitalism’ from ‘free markets’. In this way capitalism and socialism are competing and complementary; they both tend to monopolise power or resources. We need trust busting and regulation when it comes to unbridled capitalism: and probably freer markets and more private property to combat unbridled socialism. Why  can’t both philosophies be right in their own way?

    Shaun – if capitalists are really true to the spirit of competition, they should welcome socialists to compete with. But like Rupert Murdoch, who’s always complaining about state monopolies, free marketeers often just want monopolies of their own. The result of your great informative debate with Chris is that, while I think he’s a point that absolute wealth has marginally increased in some kind of trickle down, I think you’re point about the stark rise in inequality in the last ten years is more telling, and certainly does underlie the recent economic dysfunction around sub prime debt. The bailouts themselves were a massive transfer of wealth from the average tax payer to the wealthy – socialism for the rich.

    And let’s not forget that, because we’re social animals, poverty is relative rather than absolute. My experience of America, with those younger than me and older than me (I’m late 40s) is that there is a general feeling that people had more choices and freedom and relative wealth in the 50s and 60s, when the Gini co-efficient wasn’t so high. The anecdotal emotional evidence certainly supports the idea that the middle classes feel increasingly beleagured by costs, working hours, and a feeling that they are getting a lesser share of the nation’s  wealth.

    When the middle classes feel this way, a society should beware.  

Comments are closed.