Neo-Communist propaganda artist Michael Moore’s new film Capitalism: A Love Story officially bombed in its opening weekend. It made a scant $4,447,378. Why is this after the comparative successes of Fahrenheit 9/11 and Sicko?
The answer is quite simple: the focus of his previous films was hardly so fringe. Fahrenheit 9/11 critiqued the Bush administration, the War on Terror, and the Iraq War. Sicko attacked America’s crappy health care system. (Note: One can still oppose Obamacare while acknowledging the health care status quo in our country sucks.) These were issues that could resonate with more than just the Leftist True Believers. Centrists and independents could often be engaged as well.
Not so much with this new work. In Capitalism: A Love Story Moore lets his red freak flag fly in an all out assault on the capitalist system. In an interview with fellow leftist comedian Bill Maher on HBO’s “Real Time” we see just how radical Moore really is. Even Maher (who we’ve critiqued continually here at NewsReal) isn’t buying his propaganda:
Maher: I still don’t understand what direction we are supposed to move in. I mean capitalism I agree with you has gone off the rails, it’s become cronyism, it’s become corporate welfare. But in my way of thinking, the opposite of capitalism is communism. Which was trying to make the river flow in the wrong direction. At least capitalism is using what’s in human nature, which is greed. I agree that river needs a lot of dams and locks on it, it needs a lot of regulation – wouldn’t that be better than scraping the system?
Moore: We’ve heard that now for about a year since the crash. All we need are to get those regulations. How many regulations have been passed? Zero… He [Obama] has a choice to make now. Is he going to side with the people or is he going to side with Wall Street? I’m counting on him siding with the people. I believe that’s what he’s going to do and that’s what we expect him to do.
There could not be a clearer illustration of why Moore is a Neo-Communist.
Let’s break this down nice and simply because the use of “Neo-Communist,” as confrontational as it might be, is not some slur. It’s an accurate, well-thought-out descriptor of Moore’s ideology.
One of the cornerstones of Marxist thought is the division of the world into two conflicting classes: the noble proletariat workers and the malevolent bourgeoisie owners. In the Marxist schema the bourgeoisie are perpetually exploiting the proletariat. The politically ideology then flows from this basic assumption that those with less money are being screwed by those with more money.
Does this sound familiar?
All Moore — and many other so-called “progressives” — have done is replace proletariat with “the people” and bourgeoisie with “Wall Street.” My “populist progressive” friend Pat (who recently started his own blog) does this too. It’s a kitsch Marxism that is blind to the reality perceived by the vast majority of Americans: the fates of Wall Street and Main Street are intimately linked. Those that live on Main Street work for corporations that are listed on Wall Street. One cannot succeed for long at the expense of the other. This distinction between the “haves” and the “have nots” as two separate, warring entities has been demonstrated to be a lie.
But that’s not all Moore is up to. And there’s more to understand about his fringe ideology. Come back tomorrow evening as I continue the dissection of this encounter. In the mean time, check out NewsReal’s previous refutations of Moore:
David Horowitz: “Creators and Destroyers”
Michael van der Galien: “Morning Joe Pimps Michael Moore’s New Propaganda”