Filmmaker Michael Moore says it's time to put "stake in the heart" of capitalism

[marmar]

via MichaelMoore.com:



September 12th, 2009 5:29 pm
Filmmaker Michael Moore says it's time to put "stake in the heart" of capitalism

By Gregory Bonnell (CP)


TORONTO — "Manifesto" was one of the titles being bandied around by Michael Moore for his new movie - a fitting one given that his scathing attack on capitalism calls for nothing less than putting a "stake through the heart of the beast."

"Capitalism: A Love Story" examines the economic meltdown and subsequent bailout of Wall Street and calls on the audience to reject America's particular brand of free market economics in favour of a system based on the ideals of democracy.

Moore, who is promoting the movie at the Toronto International Film Festival, said Saturday that his latest work is really the culmination of two decades years of sounding the alarm about the disastrous consequences for working people when capitalist greed runs rampant.

"Capitalists love their money and they not only love their money, they love our money," Moore said. .............(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/mikeinthenews/index.php?id=14402

[BeatleBoot]

1. Why? Bush already Killed it.

DOA.


George W. Bush killed what was left of it in September 2008.

It's done.

[Archae]

2. Moore won't give up *HIS* money though, naturally...

What a jerk.

[marmar]

4. And you know this for a fact? You have his tax records?

:eyes:

[KittyWampus]

5. Did Moore get a bailout? Govt subsidies? Has his career polluted the environment?

[liskddksil]

6. He puts his movies on his website for free for anyone

what else does he need to do?

[TxRider]

71. Link to his new movie I can watch free?

[Luminous Animal]

74. Are you soliciting fellow DUers to engage in illegal activity?

Find it yourself.

[TxRider]

75. Post above says he puts his movies on his site to watch for free

Just asking for a link.

[Luminous Animal]

77. The poster above is wrong.

He doesn't put the movies on his site for free download.

[Swamp Rat]

81. I saw "Slacker Uprising" streamed from his website.

:shrug:

And he gave those of us who asked permission to download "Sicko" (I think it was from a bit torrent site).

The torrent copy of "Sicko" was then transferred to DVD format and then played once for a large group of homeless people in New Orleans (for free), using a projector and a large cement wall. The DVD was subsequently lost during hurricane Gustav, blown away like some of the Katrina survivors.

Hopefully I will have the opportunity to thank him in person on behalf of the downtrodden.

[Luminous Animal]

83. Yep. You can download "Slacker Uprising" from his site.

And Mike has been very generous in his attitude towards downloads from other sites.

[Swamp Rat]

85. I may have downloaded "Sicko" from his website

I just can't remember at the moment.

Nevertheless, he (the 'epitomized' capitalist :D) gave me permission. ;)

:hi:

edit: I have purchased at least three other movies by MM, at full price. :)

[Luminous Animal]

8. You have no fucking clue what Mike does with his money.

You, sir, are a jerk.

[Selatius]

9. Well, unless you can show us his personal finances, I think you're speaking from ignorance. nt

[Electric Monk]

10. -1

[tavalon]

15. He uses his money to fund his projects to try to get the rest of us off our asses

He wants a workers revolution and he will be at the barricades with us. You know nothing about that man, clearly.

[Rex]

76. Will you?

:eyes:

[devilgrrl]

80. How would you know?

:eyes:

Archae - your vendetta against Michael Moore just makes you look silly. You have not refuted one thing he has said... ever.

[Whisp]

82. there is the fair market capitalism and then there is

the fascist kind of capitalism that Michael is talking about. If you can't tell the difference, then go get some schooling.
No one is saying a word against fair work for fair profit, but when the megcapitalists suck on the lifeblood of common citisens its time for wakey wakey.

[1]

3. sorry, michael moore is the epitome of capitalism...

[Swamp Rat]

7. He let me watch "Sicko" and "Slacker Uprising" for free.

To me, that does not exemplify the "epitome of capitalism."

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Luminous Animal]

18. That's right. He had no control.

During an interview when asked about how he felt about free downloads of SiCKO...

"I don't agree with the copyright laws, and I don't have a problem with people downloading the movie and sharing it with people, as long as they're not doing it to make a profit off it, as long as they are not, you know, trying to make a profit off my labor. I would oppose that, but, you know, I do quite well, and I made these movies and TV shows because I want things to change. So, the more people get to see them, the better, so I'm happy that happens. Should I not be happy? I don't know, it's like, if a friend of yours had a DVD of my movie and gave it to you to watch one night, is that person doing something wrong? I'm not seeing any money from that. But he's just handing the DVD to you, so you can watch my movie. The DVD that he bought, but you're not buying it, yet you're watching it without paying me any money. You know, I think that's OK. That's always been OK, right? You share things with people. I think information, and art, and ideas should be shared."
http://www.monthlyreview.org/mrzine/moore190607.html

I don't know if Harvey Weinstein or the distributor went after anybody, but if you think Mike has any control over his producers and distributors, then I have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn.

[Electric Monk]

20. +1

[1]

24. no he didn't.

i don't know what world you live in. each and every movie released is available online the day (if not before) it is available in theaters.

google can be your friend here.

michael moore is no pioneer about copyright laws. he is a sad, unwilling participant.

michael moore makes movies to make money. a capitalist. if you think something different, you are the fool.

[Luminous Animal]

26. Who said he was pioneer? He was asked a question....

at a press conference and he answered. Yes, Moore makes money. But you have no evidence that he makes movies to make money. That is your fantasy and you've nothing to back it up.

Most of us are unwilling participants in every aspect of our legal system no matter how unfair or odious or arbitrary some of it seems and affects us personally. For instance, if Mike had posted an opportunity to download any of his movies on his website, then I am sure he would be facing Harvey in court, and he would lose. Mike and most of us, won't go out of our way to break the law or end up on the losing side of a lawsuit. There's a lot of value in life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Luminous Animal]

32. You have no evidence that Mike's sole motivation

for making movies is to make money. Some people actually are extraordinarily lucky to be able to make a living off of doing something out of conviction.

And I am 100% certain that am oodles more intelligent than you. At the very least, I am smart enough to own a computer with a shift key that is capable of producing capital letters.

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Luminous Animal]

40. Indeed.

All I have is Mike's body of work which illustrates his commitment to trials and tribulations of the average American. I see compassion, conviction, leadership, and creativity. I see a muckraker with an great sense of comedy. I'm more intelligent than you because I can present an argument based on knowledge rather than speculation.

[Name removed]

45. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Electric Monk]

46. -1

[1]

48. will you go away already? lum and i are having a discussion. it doesn't concern you...

[Electric Monk]

49. It's been kinda fun keeping score on this so far, actually

Fun to watch. Nearly the epitome of the whole debate in a nutshell, in some ways.

[Luminous Animal]

57. C'mon, Electric Monk, don't you realize that 1 & I are in the cone of silence?

[Electric Monk]

58. lol nt

[Luminous Animal]

47. Ordinarily I get off with my husband...

but sometimes he's too sleepy.


I-i-i-i-n-d-e-e-d!

[Name removed]

50. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Electric Monk]

52. bye

[Luminous Animal]

53. So now you personally know me, my husband, and Michael Moore?

S-a-weet! Let's all meet in the backyard.

[1]

60. yeah, no... i'm pretty sure i'd be sleepy too...

[tkmorris]

66. Ah, "honey". Gratuitous use of a familiarism in an attempt to deride

Right out of the playbook. You people gotta develop new tactics, the old ones are wearing thin.

[tkmorris]

65. Ya gotta be able to SELL the self-righteous indignation

You aren't quite pulling it off. It just isn't believable. Perhaps acting lessons might help?

[Name removed]

67. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[cherokeeprogressive]

89. "And I am 100% certain that am oodles more intelligent than you." Fucking hilarious. Read it again

"And I am 100% certain that am oodles more intelligent than you."

[Luminous Animal]

91. Well, I wrote it to amuse, but I have a sneakin' suspicion...

that that is not your point.

[cherokeeprogressive]

92. Absolutely correct.

My point was that in a sentence intended to prove your intellectual superiority over someone else, you left out a whole word.

If you did that on purpose, I apologize, but the irony of the whole thing made me spit out my iced tea.

[Luminous Animal]

94. I am amazed that it took this long for

anyone to notice. I'm glad it made you laugh. Childish, I know, but I used to be a member of MM's now defunct political discussion board and we'd get visitors like 1 (and worse) all the time. It was fun to mess with them for each other's amusement.

[Occulus]

29. No, he really actually did.

That quote was a direct response to a question about filesharing, and specifically IIRC SiCKO torrents, and even more specifically zero-day torrents such as what you referenced. I remember the day he made the comment. No, not the date, but I recall it being news that day. I remember him being asked about people sharing the film online, and that was his response.

He really honestly did give people who wanted to permission to download it. If you want proof that he actually followed through on that, please point your browser to www.sickomovie.com wherein you can see the whole movie streaming via Google video.

[1]

36. no, he really actually didn't.

michael released that statement AFTER the torrents had been released. after he had no control over the situation.

hey, hold michael up to be a saint if you wish. the truth is that he isn't.

michael moore makes movies to make money. believe that. don't believe that.

i don't fucking care.

[Occulus]

59. It happened, and then he said he didn't care

and that doesn't at all and in any way negate the fact that he actually doesn't care. As evidenced by the link I provided.

The fact that Moore's films actually do rake in cash in no way negates the fact that part of his intent is to affect society in a positive way by making the films. I have an analogous example: the Blender project, an open source 3D software community project, has created two short films to date, "An Elephant's Dream" and "Big Buck Bunny". Both of these projects were intended in part to further develop the 3D software used to make the films (Blender). I have very little doubt that, if the Blender Foundation were contacted by a Hollywood studio to supply visual effects for a film, the Blender Foundation would jump at the chance to a) further develop the software and b) make some cash in the process.

Thus is Moore's work. It really doesn't matter to me that he makes money from his films; what matters is that his films can be and have been a force for positive change.

I'm not going to hold him up as a saint because almost nobody is one, and I'm not going to say he isn't trying to make money because he needs to to achieve production values acceptable to Hollywood. What I am saying is that his desire to make money is not the whole of the equation on his part. He intends more than that, and good on him for exercising his creative talents in a way that makes large numbers of people actually think for a change.

[1]

61. "It really doesn't matter to me"... no. not to you. to michael? yeah, it matters...

michael gotta eat.

trust me, it matters to michael.

[Electric Monk]

19. -1

[Swamp Rat]

37. Whoa! Why all the hatred and vitriol thrown my way?

I simply said I got to watch his movies for free, streamed from his website.

Have a nice day. :hi:

[Rex]

78. No kidding right? You would think this person has something

well, personal, against MM. I guess MM beat him up in HS for lunch money! :rofl:

And to attack your art!? I can smell the jealousy vapors from here!

Sup Swampy! :hi:

[Swamp Rat]

79. Nail meets head, Rex. So, I hereby dedicate this pic to the poster above:

:D

I have been waiting for the opportunity to post this pic (with good reason) for a long time, and the poster above has generously done so. I cannot begin to thank the poster enough, so the pic dedication will have to do. It is a testament to how long the poster has survived outside of its normal, biological habitat. :D





:hi:Rex!:toast:

[Rex]

98. Dam man, that might be some of your best work!

I love your work Swamp Rat! I think it really gets some peoples goat, if ya know what I mean. :evilgrin:

:yourock: dude!

[AntiFascist]

69. -1

go get subtracted why don't you.

I believe there are two types of capitalists: productive ones and predatory ones. Moore is obviously a productive capitalist who is going after the predators.

[Selatius]

11. He definitely would be...if he would just sue people who pirate his stuff like the RIAA does. nt

[1]

14. but he can't. like the riaa can't. the genie is out of the bottle, even michael can't control it.

he knows that. the only reason he dosen't "sue."

[Luminous Animal]

22. So, when is the last time you hung out with Mike

and chatted with him about his super secret reasons for not suing?

You anti-Moore minions really need to update your talking points database. Tediously repetitive.

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Luminous Animal]

33. He was asked a question. He answered it.

The issue of control never came into play.

QUESTION: Mr. Moore, how do you feel about illegal downloads of your movie?

SHORT ANSWER: I don't give a flying fuck.

[Selatius]

64. The RIAA has pursued several lawsuits against individual violators.

It's a stupid tactic, but they have proven that it's possible to prosecute piracy in a piecemeal fashion.

However, as others have pointed out, Harvey Weinstein probably has more say in the matter than Michael Moore does, given that he legally controls distribution.

It's noteworthy to see that Moore's answer in response to the question on the topic is that he doesn't mind piracy as long as no money is made off of his work. Sort of contradicts the notion he makes movies just to make money, and anybody who tries to ignore his views on that is just full of shit.

[Luminous Animal]

12. No. Mike is the epitome of entrepreneurship

who advocates for democratic regulation of our economic system. Some of which would apply to his enterprise.

[1]

16. sure he is. right...

[Luminous Animal]

23. Yes he is. right...

Whew! Thanks for this incredibly insightful fact based discussion. You are, indeed, a formidable opponent. No doubt, you are at the top of the heap in your profession. Kudos, man. Kudos.

[1]

27. and i'm sure you are so correct. michael moore does not make movies to make money.

is that your position?

you really think that?

really?

[Luminous Animal]

30. I don't know. I don't know him.

I'm sure he wants to make enough money to support his family. I'm certain that he'd want to keep enough in reserve to make another movie or write another book. I know that he is motivated to write books and make movies that are based on his political views and I know that these political views existed before he ever made a movie (read the book Rivethead: Tales from the Assembly Line).

I am pretty sure that Mike wants to feed, clothe, and shelter himself and his family and in the crazy madcap world, he's going to have to make money in order to do so. I'm also pretty sure that each and every single person in the entire world wants to make money to do so.

You are confusing "capitalism" with making making money. (Or whatever currency of exchange that allows one to exist.)

[1]

31. no i'm not. you are. but please continue...

[Luminous Animal]

35. Again! With intellectually probing response.

One or more of these and I'm going to have to let out a big sigh and light up a cigarette.

[1]

38. what can i say lum? you think michael makes movies for fun...

i think michael makes movies to make money.

you have your opinion. i have mine.

[Electric Monk]

39. for fun? You really think so? BWAHAHAAHAAHAAHAAHAAAA!

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. You are not, however, entitled to your own facts.


/how much is it worth to you to re-attach your finger if it got sawed off at work?

[Luminous Animal]

41. Where did I say Mike makes movies for fun?

He's dead serious.

[1]

42. exactly. he's dead serious. about making money. deny that...

[Electric Monk]

43. Just like you get paid to post here? Sometimes it's not about the money.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=labor+of+love

[Luminous Animal]

44. Deny what?

Are you 4 years old? Strike that, even when my daughter was 4 years old she understood that her dad and I had to make money to survive.

Yes, he is dead serious about staying alive. Shocking.

[Mixopterus]

51. So

All people who engage in an activity that makes them money only engage in said activity to make money? Personal dedication, duty, or love never factor in?

Have you ever considered that he started off just trying to tell people what was going on and he stumbled upon money? IIRC, Moore himself said he has no problem with people having nice things or owning stuff, it's when they use their money to abuse other people that they have crossed a line.

[ConsAreLiars]

55. Can you point to any post you've ever made that does not provide

more evidence that you, even other the other nick you've since scrubbed, that you do antything other than mouth the idiotic talking pooits of the pro-corporatism whores on the TV machine?

It's a puzzle to me how someone who is savvy enough to keep from getting banned is stupid enough to always whine and wail when those who cause the greatest degree of suffering and misery here and on every part of this planet get exposed.

[Lorien]

72. Put down the doobie. nt

[SOS]

84. You know nothing about Michael Moore

He is a documentary filmmaker.

Roger and Me was financed by mortgaging his home.
When the film took off, the capitalists saw they could make some profit off his work and gave Roger and Me a distribution deal.
The deal required Warner Bros. to buy houses for the families evicted in the film and give away 20,000 tickets to the unemployed workers.

Fahrenheit 9/11 was originally financed by Harvey Weinstein at Miramax.
Disney owned Miramax. When the reactionary capitalists at Disney discovered that Weinstein was funding Moore's movie they did everything in their power to stop the film.
Eisner at Disney refused to release the film once it was completed.
Disney was afraid of offending Bush and the Saudi royal family.
Weinstein and Moore eventually got the film into an independent deal with IFC and Fellow Adventure Group.
They had to repay the Disney cowards the full cost of the film.

Disney, Fox, Exxon, Pfizer and United Health are the epitome of our current system of state monopoly capitalism, not Michael Moore.

[kentuck]

17. But let's do it incrementally...

The stress and trauma would be more than our nation could handle. It would be revolutionary.

[havocmom]

21. Hmmm, capitalism on a stick!

Didn't they serve that at a DEM fair in Minnesota?

[Lagomorph]

54. Everybody is a capitalist...

Everybody looks for ways to bring in income. Property = stability.

Now Corporatism, we need to clamp down on those bastards the same way we clamped down on the Robber Barons.

[Luminous Animal]

56. Well, only those who control capital & labor could be defined

as a capitalist. The rest of us merely work within the capitalist system. That is, the vast majority of us supply our labor, not only to survive, but to enrich someone else.

So no, very few of us in the U.S. are capitalists but all of us are forced to survive within this capitalist system.

[Lagomorph]

62. You're correct, of course...

The vast majority of the people try to be self sufficient or better.

Until recently, I've seen far more poor people become capitalists than the opposite.

Around here it's Latte' stands. Young women start out working at one, a few years later they own one, then two, then five...

Not rich, but making $5,000 a week slinging coffee. Within 1/4 mile of me I have two Starbucks and five drive thru latte' stands. Within a mile there are a lot more.

The county came in and started demanding property improvements, which raises the bar significantly. So the women who are established with good incomes are more capable of expanding their business than a startup, locking out the competition. The government gets taxes and property improvements from the existing Latte' stands and the women who work there now have no hope of starting their own stand anymore.

If you use your imagination, you can extrapolate that into the situation we have today, where the established capitalists and the government are both working to maximize their cash flow and keep out the competition that keeps them honest.

[1]

63. right... very few of us actually engage in prostitution. the rest of us merely spread our legs...

its not us, its them...

gotcha!

[joeycola]

68. And the WH and many Dems in Congress love greedy capitalism.

[kenny blankenship]

73. Side effect of the Reagan Koolaid.

Even though we've just witnessed the whole system exposed as a fraud, they keep calling for Hair of the Dog, Hair of the Dog.

[Joe Chi Minh]

70. What heart?

[Taverner]

86. Great idea but, replace it with what?

Communism? Fuck no. Been there done that, people lied and people died.

Socialism? Good idea, but we are already practicing socialism to a great degree.

Distributism? Ahhh but this always begs the question who does the distributing, and how do we keep him or her from 'distributing' everything to himself (see Mugabe, Caecescu)

Anarchism? Although I'm an anarchist at heart, good luck with that one! See Mad Max for a play by play account.

[Luminous Animal]

87. I haven't seen the movie but most likely Mike

will advocate for democratic control of our economic capitalistic system.

[Luminous Animal]

88. "Life Inc.: How the World Became a Corporation and How to Take It Back"

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1400066891?ie=UTF8&tag=daikos-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=1400066891

This book looks like it will be a fine companion to Mike's movie.

Review by Devilstower on DKos.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/9/12/780978/-This-Corporate-Life

Many of the specific incidents Rushkoff uses in his book are familiar, but stripped of marketing inventions, those events have a very different feel. Underneath the textbook heroics, characters from the great "Age of Exploration" turn out to have been unconcerned with expanding human knowledge, or even with finding new markets. Instead they actively worked against exploration to protect their own interests. Adam Smith, conservative saint, is revealed as a crusader against the spread of international corporations, as someone whose plea to preserve small, local business was co-opted to serve the corporations he was warning against.

How would the people screaming around the reflection pool this past Saturday react if you told them that a big part of what drove the American Revolution was not the unfair actions the British government, but the grinding tactics of British corporations? That it was as much about stopping laissez-faire economics, as it was about turning back taxation without representation?

Quick: what's the purpose of a corporation? If you think about it for a few minutes, you can come up with a justification about encouraging innovation by protecting investors from failing along with their ideas. The truth is, corporations are such a part of our lives that most of us are as likely to ask the purpose of the sun. And heck, every heartwarming story of a corporate CEO seems to start with the tale of how he or she drove three businesses into the ground before hitting it big, and who would want to mess with a system like that?

Rushkoff shows that corporations don't owe their origins to a desire for fostering innovation or to open up the investor class. It wasn't about building an "ownership society" or encouraging enterprise. Corporations were invented to stop all those things. They were invented because the ruling class saw that the middle class was ascendant, that the would-be bourgeoisie were expanding their wealth and threatening to squirm out from under the thumbs of their upper-class lords. The aristocracy created the corporation to perpetuate the control of the aristocracy.

[undergroundpanther]

90. I agree with Moore

A stake in the heart of capitalism means the death of the extravagant lifestyles of every incompetent,swindling,asshole, psychopath,narcissist,authoritarian bully running the ponzi called wall street.

[yurbud]

93. a thought on a simple corporate reform: one PERSON one vote instead of one DOLLAR one vote

[mzmolly]

95. This is all we need with Republicans calling Dems socialists.

I adore Michael Moore, but this talking point is moronic. :eyes:

[anonymous171]

96. I personally would settle for simply staking the hearts of the Capitalists.

No revolution would be necessary if the wealthy were kept in line.

[wolfgangmo]

97. If you think about it the fall of the soviet union

... pretty much proved that capitalism doesn't work and that the myth about it is almost unstopable.

Soviet style economy was basically capitalism in it's rawest form. It was as if IBM had purchased every company on the planet and you couldn't work unless you worked for them on their terms and by their rules. And although the soviets practices pure capitalism, they preached something much different.

And so when the soviet union fell, it both proved the failure of pure capitalism at the same time that it made it seem that it wasn't capitalism. It also lead to the increased disassembly of any rational regulation on capitalism in the west and voila, here we are today, screwed and being prepared for ownership.

At least Moore is trying to open some minds.

[Electric Monk]

99. Can't wait to see it. nt.