It’s bound to be one of the most controversial of the season’s cinematic offerings: Michael Moore’s Capitalism. Muddied low-brow critique or seminal turning point in the popular appreciation of a system past decay? You be the judge!
To help flesh out the argument, Crikey sent two of its most bristlingly politicised regulars to take in the movie and offer their thoughts.
This from the IPA’s Chris Berg:
… Moore’s argument is even more misdirected. He’s justifiably outraged at the bailouts and the way they were pushed through Congress. Who isn’t? He’s angry about the favour-trading relationship between Wall Street and Washington. Again, who isn’t?
For Moore, Barack Obama’s election is a spiritual catharsis, an explosion of people power, and a sudden break with the capitalist nightmare. But the outrages he spent 90 minutes detailing have, if anything, gotten worse under the Obama administration. The employment pipeline between Goldman Sachs and Treasury has is even busier. And Obama has graduated from bailing out banks to bailing out car companies. For Moore, when Bush did this sort of thing, it was capitalism. When Obama does, it’s democracy.
In Capitalism: A Love Story, Moore can’t quite get himself to the problem. If he did, he’d have to admit that the big activist government of his dreams is actually the cause of his nightmares. Read Chris’s full piece here.
This from Overland editor Jeff Sparrow:
Moore’s clearly on the side of the downtrodden but what that means in terms of a political program remains something of a mystery. Thus, on the one hand, he’s overtly nostalgic for the ’50s of his childhood; on the other, throughout the movie, he employs clips from ’50s documentaries (square-jawed men in suits; bouffant-haired housewives, etc) for a comic effect that implicitly rests on the awfulness of the decade. It’s a contradiction that continues to the closing credits, played out with a schmaltzy lounge version of the Internationale. “Arise ye workers from your slumbers”: Moore simultaneously uses the track for a gag even as, in some fashion, he wants us to take the sentiment seriously.
Moore always features in his own movies and in many respects his films resemble their narrator: bloated and sprawling, self-indulgent and infuriating, but, ultimately, on the right side. There’s plenty of things not to like about Capitalism: A Love Story. But it’s hard to think of another filmmaker who would even attempt a popular documentary about the financial crisis, and if he only succeeds half-way, well, that’s half way better than any of his contemporaries. Read Jeff’s full piece here.
And just for the sake of balance, here’s what Crikey’s film guy, Luke Buckmaster thought:
It’s hard however, especially for those who lean to the left, not to agree with the long and short of his hypothesises – i.e. that the U.S. health care system is horrible and ravaged (Sicko), American gun laws are dangerous and inhumane (Bowling for Columbine) and the Bush administration were a pack of mongrels and thieves (Fahrenheit 9/11). Capitalism: A Love Story presents Moore’s broadest assertion yet: that capitalism is if not downright evil then certainly corrosive, immoral, punishing to the small guys and about as appealing as a fart in a sleeping bag. Again it’s kinda hard to disagree with his basic stance even if most viewers (not unreasonably) will probably wrap a devil-you-know context around the debate in absence of a clear workable alternative. Moore paints an important distinction between democracy and capitalism, arguing that one can and should exist without the other. Like a lot of the material here (such as an intriguing segment about a democratically operated company where all workers own an equal share and take a part in the decision making) this begs to be further extrapolated.
Moore’s sprawling scattershot approach in Capitalism: A Love Story feels like he set out to make a film about the GFC but decided somewhere along the line to train his sights on a much larger beast. Thus the film’s disjointed structure connects case studies – all of them interesting, a few of them fascinating – sometimes spuriously to the grander concept. Luke’s full review is here.
Your turn. Have you seen the movie? Do you have a view on the health or otherwise of market capitalism? Is capitalism culpable in our recent economic woes? Can a better system ever be devised? Should Michael Moore lay off the doughnuts? Join the discussion!
9 Comments
Wow – that really is a titanic struggle! Cage-match wise, this is going to be climate change/Demidenko/Henson affair combined! I told two people in the internet cafe i was commenting on this and they got into a fist-fight about the film! Incredible stuff!
Or the Burchett Chronicles. Here at Crikey we love a good stoush…
I didn’t go along (thanks Crikey) looking for answers or expecting a watertight thesis.
All the above commentators make great points. A core message, that our unregulated economy has been hijacked by the greedy is demonstrably true.
We’ve all got a reasonab;le idea about how it happened , albeit with a minor variations. But what can we do about it? I don’t think Kev or Barack etc, can actually do much. They are being swept along in a tide of culture and mindset.
Setting aside any debate about the political arguments in the film, I thought it would have worked much better as a series of 1-hour TV shows. It covers too much ground, it’s unfocused and rambling. There doesn’t appear to be a coherent thread that pulls together his various arguments and the vignettes he presents.
Two words. Joe. Queenan.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2009/nov/03/hollywood-genre-repetition
Re: Michael Moore
Overall, I like what Michael Moore has had to say but why wouldn’t I? I pose as an anarchist but, like him, I live as a small ‘l’ liberal and try to take advantage of the privileges that this status accords me. When I think about it, I feel ashamed that I don’t do more to change the world but I console myself, as Michael (and everyone at Crikey) probably does, by reminding myself that I can’t do it alone. I stress here that Michael has tried much harder to change things than I’ve been able to, but I wonder about the results of his efforts.
Michael knows, as I do, that ‘democracy’ and ‘capitalism’ are contradictory terms, unless, of course, one buys into the myth of ‘representative democracy’ (how can a single politician possibly represent two or more constituents with conflicting views?). The myth of representative democracy has been used in the West since 1945 to give fascism a nicer face. Fascism (under the guise of capitalism) has continued to thrive and to bring the world to a point at which it is falling apart, politically, socially and ecologically.
Having said this, I’d like to express an opinion: the small ‘l’ liberals of the world still have the opportunity to change things for the better. Their numbers are sufficient to overthrow fascism and to institute genuine participative democracy, but they must use their political influence. Some activists, like Susan Sarandon and Whoopi Goldberg, made important inroads in this connection but they seem to have been silenced.
I’d very much like high-profile people like Michael Moore and others I’ve mentioned to promote the view that capitalism really doesn’t work. Again, in my opinion, if the current way of administering the world is not overhauled as a matter of great urgency, the fascists will use their demonstrated ability to manipulate the populist vote until we all perish.
Comments to the effect that Michael Moore ‘battles for the small guy’ don’t change anything. Unless people with influence act to unite the world’s small ‘l’ liberals against the destruction of our environment, and, most importantly, against the consignment of whole populations to the sea (or genocide), we are, in my opinion, all doomed.
Bruce Stanger, Geraldton WA
There are many better systems out there
One that I have been learning more about is the ‘Resource Based Economy’ (google it)
A good place to start is…
http://www.TheVenusProject.com
88.9 SkidRow Radio 6am-9pm most weekdays (Sydney)
and various Truth Movements in your local cities (Sure, some are a little extreme, but most have some very good information that you can learn from)
youtube search – ‘Open your mind and see everything how it really is’ – has some good points
The current system suppresses any radically new information emerging and palms it off as futuristic or wacky… but aren’t we yet more intelligent than ever before to out-grow our outdated ’system’ (even the monetary system)
The system now is in far worse shape than the governments of the world are letting on, and we the people are blindly going along with it (so much distraction to keep us oblivious)…. switch off the TV (channels 7,9,10 are very bad for news, its so shameful) and look at what is going on around you, please wake up… EDUCATE YOURSELF!!
After seen Capitalism the film: Americans need to take up arms—a bloody revolution, that is the vaccine this sick American system needs. The safety valves are blocked, and are no longer working. Bring it on I say. Regards Richard Ryan.
After seen the film Capitalism, the sheer greed of this American society is hard to take.A revolution a bloody may be the vaccine, to get the safety valves working again—–which have been blocked for so long—bring it on I say. Regards Richard Ryan.