Moore's New Schlockumentary
July 28, 2016 at 4:25 p.m.
By Gary [email protected]
It's called "Capitalism: A Love Story."
The film is an attack on what Moore calls "unfettered American capitalism." Moore says the system benefits the top 1 percent of the richest Americans at the expense of everybody else.
Moore has long bloviated on the evils of free markets and corporate greed.
It might be a bit trite to mention, but it is this very same free-market capitalism that has made Moore a very rich man, but never mind.
And I suppose it would be shallow of me to point out that the guy who financed this project for Moore was none other than John Malone.
Malone owns Liberty Media. A unit of Liberty Media is Overture Films. Overture Films co-financed and distributed "Capitalism" for Moore.
Here's how LA Times writer Joe Flint characterized Malone:
"He's been labeled a monopolist. Al Gore called him 'Darth Vader.' He's a master of the tax-free deal, a champion of unfettered free markets, completely disdains government and most federal regulations and has expressed a fondness for Rush Limbaugh. Earlier this summer he was slapped with a $1.4 million fine by the Justice Department for illegal stock purchases."
Seems to me this Malone guy would more likely be a target of the film than it's financier, but hey, whatever it takes to get the message out, I guess.
Of course, I haven't seen the film. I have only read reviews and heard what Moore has to say about it. But it seems to me there is this giant fatal flaw in Moore's premise.[[In-content Ad]]And it's not a liberal/conservative thing.
For example, reviewers of the film say a portion of the film rails on the bailouts given to Wall Street. Well, it was the conservative Republicans in Congress who didn't vote for those.
Moore is a big-time liberal, to be sure, but the flaw doesn't lie in ideology.
Moore just straight up doesn't get it.
It's not free markets and capitalism that has created the economic and sociological messes we've wound up with. It's the way our government has evolved. I would go so far to say that a pure form of a free-market economy and capitalism might just be the best be for saving what's left of this republic.
It started out OK.
It started out as a constitutional republic that was to be governed by the people. Citizen legislators were supposed to go to Washington and do the bidding of the citizens who elected them.
And they did - for a while.
I can't say for sure exactly when, because it was an insidious evolution of sorts. But I can say for sure that we no longer live in a constitutional republic.
See, a constitutional republic is a government where the head of state and other officials are elected as representatives of the people, and must govern according to existing constitutional law that limits the government's power over citizens.
In a constitutional republic, executive, legislative and judicial powers are separated into branches. This separation of powers protects individual rights and ensures no individual or group has absolute power,
Wonderful concept, but that's not what's going on in today's American.
Seems to me we've morphed into some twisted corporate oligarchy. By definition, an oligarchy is a government where power rests with a "small elite segment of society distinguished by royal, wealth, intellectual, family, military or religious hegemony (domination.)" Only in America the "elite segment" is corporations and the lobbyists they employ.
Doesn't that sound about right? Isn't that a better description of our government these days?
Let's be honest a minute. With limited exceptions, the majority of our "citizen legislators" so ardently toiling for us in Washington don't know or care what their constituents want. What they do care about is the next lobbyist through the office door with a fat pile of cash to stuff in their campaign coffers - or in their pockets, depending on just how shady they are feeling that day.
So, of course, most of the laws that are passed are going to be tilted to the advantage of the corporations - unions, or whoever else - is paying the lobbyists. Problem is, you and I - the citizens in "citizen legislature" - don't employ any lobbyists.
Let's be honest for a moment.
Was it free-market capitalism that:
Won't allow health insurance companies to compete across state lines?
Won't allow generic drugs to be manufactured until 20 years from the date of submission of the patent of the name brand?
Incentivized corporations to send jobs overseas?
Drove auto industry wages including legacy costs to almost $70 per hour?
Forced banks to make home loans to people who didn't qualify?
Allowed savings and loans to start operating like banks?
Allowed bundling and "securitization" of toxic assets?
Created bizarre investment opportunities like credit default swaps and derivative trading?
I could go on and on, but you get the picture. Proponents of true free-market capitalism cringed at all those things. That's not a free market. That's a market manipulated by a government bought out by special interests.
Free-market capitalism tends to weed out bad apples. The strange form of economic system we have today - fully supported and nurtured by our government - actually rewards the bad apples.
The big guys get bigger by influencing lawmakers to craft legislation that tilts the game their way. Meanwhile, little guys get squeezed by onerous regulations tossed in under the guise of protecting us from ourselves.
And you thought Bernie Madoff had a Ponzi scheme going on.
I'm sorry, Mr. Moore, but capitalism isn't the problem. The problem is a monstrous, out-of-control, omnipotent, over-spending, inept, inefficient federal government.
And the current crop of politicos want it to be exponentially larger. Totally wrong direction. Totally wrong.
I'm dead serious.
If we don't begin to severely limit the size and scope of government - and soon - government is going to be all that is left in this country.
And there won't be enough of us to pay for it.
It's called "Capitalism: A Love Story."
The film is an attack on what Moore calls "unfettered American capitalism." Moore says the system benefits the top 1 percent of the richest Americans at the expense of everybody else.
Moore has long bloviated on the evils of free markets and corporate greed.
It might be a bit trite to mention, but it is this very same free-market capitalism that has made Moore a very rich man, but never mind.
And I suppose it would be shallow of me to point out that the guy who financed this project for Moore was none other than John Malone.
Malone owns Liberty Media. A unit of Liberty Media is Overture Films. Overture Films co-financed and distributed "Capitalism" for Moore.
Here's how LA Times writer Joe Flint characterized Malone:
"He's been labeled a monopolist. Al Gore called him 'Darth Vader.' He's a master of the tax-free deal, a champion of unfettered free markets, completely disdains government and most federal regulations and has expressed a fondness for Rush Limbaugh. Earlier this summer he was slapped with a $1.4 million fine by the Justice Department for illegal stock purchases."
Seems to me this Malone guy would more likely be a target of the film than it's financier, but hey, whatever it takes to get the message out, I guess.
Of course, I haven't seen the film. I have only read reviews and heard what Moore has to say about it. But it seems to me there is this giant fatal flaw in Moore's premise.[[In-content Ad]]And it's not a liberal/conservative thing.
For example, reviewers of the film say a portion of the film rails on the bailouts given to Wall Street. Well, it was the conservative Republicans in Congress who didn't vote for those.
Moore is a big-time liberal, to be sure, but the flaw doesn't lie in ideology.
Moore just straight up doesn't get it.
It's not free markets and capitalism that has created the economic and sociological messes we've wound up with. It's the way our government has evolved. I would go so far to say that a pure form of a free-market economy and capitalism might just be the best be for saving what's left of this republic.
It started out OK.
It started out as a constitutional republic that was to be governed by the people. Citizen legislators were supposed to go to Washington and do the bidding of the citizens who elected them.
And they did - for a while.
I can't say for sure exactly when, because it was an insidious evolution of sorts. But I can say for sure that we no longer live in a constitutional republic.
See, a constitutional republic is a government where the head of state and other officials are elected as representatives of the people, and must govern according to existing constitutional law that limits the government's power over citizens.
In a constitutional republic, executive, legislative and judicial powers are separated into branches. This separation of powers protects individual rights and ensures no individual or group has absolute power,
Wonderful concept, but that's not what's going on in today's American.
Seems to me we've morphed into some twisted corporate oligarchy. By definition, an oligarchy is a government where power rests with a "small elite segment of society distinguished by royal, wealth, intellectual, family, military or religious hegemony (domination.)" Only in America the "elite segment" is corporations and the lobbyists they employ.
Doesn't that sound about right? Isn't that a better description of our government these days?
Let's be honest a minute. With limited exceptions, the majority of our "citizen legislators" so ardently toiling for us in Washington don't know or care what their constituents want. What they do care about is the next lobbyist through the office door with a fat pile of cash to stuff in their campaign coffers - or in their pockets, depending on just how shady they are feeling that day.
So, of course, most of the laws that are passed are going to be tilted to the advantage of the corporations - unions, or whoever else - is paying the lobbyists. Problem is, you and I - the citizens in "citizen legislature" - don't employ any lobbyists.
Let's be honest for a moment.
Was it free-market capitalism that:
Won't allow health insurance companies to compete across state lines?
Won't allow generic drugs to be manufactured until 20 years from the date of submission of the patent of the name brand?
Incentivized corporations to send jobs overseas?
Drove auto industry wages including legacy costs to almost $70 per hour?
Forced banks to make home loans to people who didn't qualify?
Allowed savings and loans to start operating like banks?
Allowed bundling and "securitization" of toxic assets?
Created bizarre investment opportunities like credit default swaps and derivative trading?
I could go on and on, but you get the picture. Proponents of true free-market capitalism cringed at all those things. That's not a free market. That's a market manipulated by a government bought out by special interests.
Free-market capitalism tends to weed out bad apples. The strange form of economic system we have today - fully supported and nurtured by our government - actually rewards the bad apples.
The big guys get bigger by influencing lawmakers to craft legislation that tilts the game their way. Meanwhile, little guys get squeezed by onerous regulations tossed in under the guise of protecting us from ourselves.
And you thought Bernie Madoff had a Ponzi scheme going on.
I'm sorry, Mr. Moore, but capitalism isn't the problem. The problem is a monstrous, out-of-control, omnipotent, over-spending, inept, inefficient federal government.
And the current crop of politicos want it to be exponentially larger. Totally wrong direction. Totally wrong.
I'm dead serious.
If we don't begin to severely limit the size and scope of government - and soon - government is going to be all that is left in this country.
And there won't be enough of us to pay for it.
Have a news tip? Email [email protected] or Call/Text 360-922-3092