Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
- So God Made A Factory Farmer...And Pesticides. And Subsidies. And Corn Syrup. And Mexicans.
- Who Can Own Life? Farmer vs. Monsanto Before US High Court
- Profiting From Human Misery
- With Little More Than a Note, Obama Deploys US Troops To Niger
- 5 Reasons Why the Keystone XL Pipeline is Bad for the Economy
- Who Can Own Life? Farmer vs. Monsanto Before US High Court
- Profiting From Human Misery
- Decolonize the Consumerist Wasteland: Re-imagining a World Beyond Capitalism and Communism
- Scale Implosion: After Ruining America, the Era of Giant Chain Stores Is Over
- 5 Reasons Why the Keystone XL Pipeline is Bad for the Economy
Popular content
Today's Top News
A 75th Anniversary for the American Dream, a 25-Year Anniversary for Me
On this day 25 years ago, in 1987, I became a filmmaker. It was around ten in the morning and the first-ever roll of Kodak 16mm film for my first-ever movie was loaded into my friend's camera to shoot the very first scene of 'Roger & Me.' I had no idea on that morning in Flint, Michigan what my life would be like after that, or what would happen to Flint, or to General Motors. It all felt fairly ominous, though -- after all, GM, which was posting record profits at the time, was closing its first Flint factory (the first of what would become many) and unemployment in Flint had officially been listed as high as 29%. Surely things couldn't get much worse.
That morning, 25 years ago today, a group of autoworkers had come together on the lawn of the soon-to-be-closed Buick-Oldsmobile-Cadillac assembly plant to raise their voices against the closing -- and to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the Great Flint Sit-Down Strike, which had begun at that very factory. That strike, in 1936-37, was actually an occupation. Hundreds of workers took over the factories in Flint and refused to leave for 44 days until GM capitulated and recognized their union. The strike inspired thousands of other workers across the country to stage their own occupations and, before you knew it, in the years to follow, factory workers were paid a living wage, with benefits, vacations, and a safe working place.
The middle class and the American Dream were born 75 years ago today, on February 11, 1937, the day the Flint workers won their struggle. And for the next 44 years, working people everywhere got to own their own homes, send their kids to college and never worry about going broke if they got sick. That belief, that life would be good if you were a good citizen and a hard worker, now seems out of reach for nearly half the country which is either living in or near poverty. Perhaps people wouldn't mind it as much if the burden were being evenly shared. But everyone knows that's not the case. In a time of record personal bankruptcies, record home foreclosures, record family and student debt, there are a group of people having the best years of wealth and profit ever recorded in human history. And it is those very people who have made the decisions to export our jobs, to decimate unions, to make college unaffordable, to start wars and to pay themselves with gluttonous joy while paying little or no tax -- this is the 1% that has created the burden so many Americans (and people around the world) now share.
And so, 75 years after the victory in Flint, the battle is now being fought all over again. But this time it's not just about getting paid a dollar an hour, or having Sunday off, or reducing the chance of your hand being crushed in the metal stamping machine. This time, the stakes are even greater: Who is going to own America and control the basic functions of our democracy -- the richest 1% who buy the politicians to get what they want, or the 99% who don't have much these days and live in anxiety or fear of what's around the bend.
I believe that justice will win out again, in the end, just as it did 75 years ago today in Flint in 1937.
I have no special plans to mark this day of anniversaries other than to post a short story I wrote called 'Gratitude.' You may have read it in my book, but if not, here it is to freely download and enjoy:
http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/must-read/gratitude
If you'd like to hear me read it in my own voice, click here:
http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/must-read/gratitude-audio
It tells, in part, the story of that day I first placed that roll of Kodak film into a movie camera. I am proud of the town I was born in, and I'm proud of my uncle who participated in the Sit-Down Strike. I am grateful to those of you who have gone to my movies over the years, and I thank all of you who have been inspired by the Occupy Wall Street movement to speak up on behalf of the 99%.
There's no turning back now. Onward!
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
134 Comments so far
Show All"Obama is no better and no worse than any other electoral choice in any way that matters."
Wrong. Many civil libertarians believe that on civil liberties, O is worse than just about any other president in history. That matters. (Turley, Greenwald, Boyle)
When Bush was president, all I heard from the left were inflamed comments about him, about Cheney, Rummy, Rice, et al. , their sneers, stupidity, evil. It went on and on and on. They couldn't stop talking and fretting over the personalities. Suddenly, O gets elected, employs similar policies - only far worse on civil liberties - and suddenly the left decides that it's oh so meaningless to consider personalities. Lemme tell ya, The personalities represent something. You're either for what they represent or not. Ideally, we would vote on issues, maybe some kind of national referendum to get around the personality thing.
Between elections we need to keep organizing and pushing back, developing alternatives. But voting matters. It's a collective voice.
And if voting doesn't matter, why not do it for old times sake but vote for who you want this time. When the left is willing to do that, I'll believe them when they say it doesn't matter.
rvrwalker
Very well said. What people like Two Americas do not appear to realize is that Obama is not only continuing Bush's militant policies in Afghanistan but also expanding American aggression in such places as Pakistan, Yemen, Libya, and Somalia. To claim like he does that "Obama is no better and no worse than any other electoral choice in any way that matters" is an example of someone who appears to be in deep denial about the harm that Obama has done as he, Obama, has managed to supersede the actions of a warmonger like Bush. And while Obama continues to rain down 500 lb. bombs and drone missiles upon people in foreign lands and signs a bill [the NDAA] which allows the U.S. to detain people who are suspected of being terrorists indefinitely the American people utter nary a peep of protest concerning Obama's loathsome actions.
Erroll, You are absolutely correct re Obama and public response, or the lack of it to his dismantling of the Constitution and blatant war crimes. He is far ,more dangerous than most of the other repubs. That's why they are running him for a 2nd term.
I agree with TA that the way to resist or change this unfortunate situation is not through the electoral process. The oligarchy controls this system. We need to change the structure of existing systems one step at a time, through political education (including ourselves) organizing and subverting the status quo. The system is rigged Erroll, if we waste our energy in the limited universe of this structure, we are guaranteed to lose every single time.
Do you really imagine that I do not realize that "Obama is not only continuing Bush's militant policies in Afghanistan but also expanding American aggression in such places as Pakistan, Yemen, Libya, and Somalia??"
Of course I realize that. I just don't harbor the childish illusion that "if only" we voted for someone else, that somehow the juggernaut would be stopped.
What that tells us is not that we should therefore obsess over rejecting Obama, but rather question the efficacy of the entire electoral political system, does it not?
Obama is an errand boy for those in power. Only errand boys for those in power can get elected. Thinking that rejecting Obama would make a difference is no less delusional than thinking that supporting Obama would make a difference.
Voting is not a "collective voice" any more than consumer shopping choices are. You are confusing a demotic process with a democratic one. "Choice" is not a voice. Individual decisions based on personal belief can not be "collective." That is a lie that comes from commercial sales and marketing.
What people "represent" - or what is "in their hearts" or what their "beliefs" are - is completely irrelevant. Where they stand and what they do is what matters.
The people in power don't "represent" anything other than the material interests of the few. they don't have any "beliefs" or "ideals" or philosophy. All of that is a fairy tale.
I agree with you about the rampant hypocrisy among liberals, progressives and Democrats.
You say that between elections we need to keep organizing and pushing back, developing alternatives. I think the way you are looking at that is the problem. Rather, we should say between working and organizing we vote. See the difference? In the first case all politics is seen as held within the context of elections. Elections are seen as the "bottom line" ad who gets into office is seen as the goal to strive for. In the second way of looking at this, elections, office holders, and voting are put into the proper perspective: as an effect, and a relatively minor one, of the political work we do.
Yes, the police state is growing and the wealthy and powerful few are consolidating their hold over all of us. That would be happening no matter who was in the White House. Therefore, obsessing over Obama - for or against - is missing the forest for the trees.
I thought Moore was undemocratic, along with the Democratic Party, when they attempted to discredit the candidate of my choice and sabotage his already weak chances. I assume you do realize that Moore has a lot of power. I think if he came out tomorrow and said he was supporting the Green Party, at least hundreds of thousands would follow him. I've come to realize that certain personalities - fabricated or not - can herd people in almost any direction. Goebbles knew that. Did you see the polls that show a majority of liberals supporting the NDAA. If Bush were doing this, the left would be livid. In my entire life, I have never seen this kind of hypocrisy among the left. Maybe I wasn't paying attention.
Partisan electoral politics is not how social and political change happens.
You're basically correct on this; but partisan electoral politics are often part of the mix of social change and require serious consideration with other factors in developing a power analysis that works.
Consider Frederick Douglas, who spent alot of time and energy working politicians and the parties. He was a successful US revolutionary and not a sell-out by any means. Or check out Native American scholar-activist Vine Deloria, Jr.
Yes. Agreed.
Lemmings of the world unite.
Trylon
But Moore will still stump the Corporate Empire's Creature Obama, so nothing he writes means much. Lately I've heard that Obama isn't responsible for increased numbers of people on food stamps, lower wages, etc. But, yes, he really is, just like his predecessors, but he -- and they -- have supported and stumped for the policies that have brought on these circumstances. They are the Creatures of Empire -- nothing more, nothing less. They sold their souls long before they were chosen to run for POTUS. Obama is the most blatant personification of this, but the tragedy really is the people who continue to promote him, no matter what he does. All the major voices are in place for the Obama -- Baby Kos, Maddow, Maher, Moore, Matthews, Schultz, etc. -- and the people who listen to these "talking heads" without thinking for themselves.
Nonsense.
Only if we hold fast to the naive notion that voting changes eanything could we sort people out into good guys and bad guys according to their statements about partisan electoral politics.
Moore advocates for organized Labor and militant mass action. His position is far more radical than that of those who talk about alternative electoral choices.
Not nonsense. For one thing, no one is saying here that voting changes everything. But it can change some things if the people are behind those changes. Politicians represent philosophy, policy. The people of Iceland, Argentina, Venezuela, etc. got screwed because they trusted, voted for, certain politicians who promoted elite driven policies. Finally, after getting burned, they got smart and voted them out. Yes, they also organized and fought back. They didn't make apologies for politicians who represent the elite or claim that voting is unimportant.
Of course voting changes something - it changes itself - when, and only when "the people are behind those changes." But once those conditions are met, everything changes, including voting.
I am not "making apologies for politicians who represent the elite or claiming that voting is unimportant."
I did not say that anyone here is claiming that "voting changes everything." I do say that there are people here who see voting as the ultimate, as the last, as the most important step in some process for change, and that they see voting as a cause rather than an effect of social and political change. I do say that people see political action as leading to the electoral process, as the culmination and ratification of political action.
error
"I believe that justice will win out again, in the end, just as it did 75 years ago today in Flint in 1937."
I think that will happen only if we decide to work to build a strong third party, Michael.
How about dumping the Dims and advocating for a party that will really represent us - like the Greens?
You are a dupe, or an agent, purveying the oldest COINTELPRO tactic in the handbook - a variant of "snitch-jacketing." None of your accusations are true - his relatively modest house in Traverse City, MI is not in a gated community - although he no doubt receives frequent death threats and therefore must spend some money on security measures. He flies coach on regularly scheduled airlines, he may rent a limousine and tux for an a occasional film festival. He personally restored an old movie theater and foots the bill for the Traverse City Film Festival held there. So what? I don't know about this "penthouse" - and he almost certainly does not own a bank, although like almost everyone, he probably has a couple accounts - but it follows a three outright lies, so it seem dubious too.
And the 2nd "oldest COINTELPRO tactic in the handbook," is an agent supposedly acting progressively by calling out and defrocking a fellow but 'disposable' agent conspirator, to attempt to enhance his own weakened credibility from having been repetitively revealed as suspiciously non-progressive, while attacking and invalidating actual progressives.
pjd412's inflated strident and absurd advocacy of the official 911 govt conspiracy narrative is proof enough of who he really is, and who he really serves.
Even a high school student taking physics, knows more about free fall acceleration of unencumbered structures, then this supposedly knowledgeable "civil engineer" does.
So how does someone yet to graduate from high school (with a few months of physics) know much more, than a supposedly well experienced "professional engineer" with the benefit of decades of learning and training ?
I will be as kind as you were, and allow for the wiggle room that you MAY just be a "dupe" whose accentuated and highly vocal advocacy for nonsense, is merely a twisted outgrowth of arrogant ignorance.
But that's hard to swallow, and it is bellied with pjd412's attempts to deceitfully wrap that wolfishness in the sheepskin covering of being a degreed engineer, that cannot even bring himself up to a high school level of understanding of his supposed career.
So, it is insufficient in your mind that a person rejects the official version of events? They must also fully embrace your preferred alternative theory, or else they are paid operatives working for the government? It matters not what their position is on anything else? They are to be suspected, when and if you say so?
The insinuations and speculation and suspicion you are leveling at the other poster goes a long way toward sabotaging the community here. But you claim to be unmasking saboteurs?
"Wiggle room?" Are you the Grand Inquisitor or something? Is someone on trial?
Your slyness, bellies your continued deceit.
(1.) No, for me "it is [sufficient] … that a person" actively promulgates "the official version of events," to assess if they have any real independent veracity and authenticity. Your attempting to reverse the clear intent of my writing is not a promising or sincere approach to having a discussion.
(2.) No, I am calling out someone who has along pattern of abuse here on CD, who had already launched "insinuations and speculation and suspicion … leveling at the other poster" (lanista). Granted, your own calm reply (Feb 12 2012 - 12:18pm) makes it clear that lanista is either vastly deceptive, or ignorant beyond measure.
(3.) No, my merely saying something w/o evidence is meaningless, so you twist the demonstrable reality of my posting -- to imply that it is merely my **whim** that -- "They are to be suspected, when and if you say so?" No, It's PJD's own lack of any basic knowledge of physics, while claiming to be a professional Civil Engineer that indicts his own words.
(4.) It is my observation that he was likely working in an indirect partnership with the first, in an attempt to pander his nest and seemingly elevate his flakey 'street cred'.
(5.) You indict me for doing exactly the same thing he did, but essentially grant PDJ impunity to do -- what you target that ONLY I -- was "goes a long way toward sabotaging the community here."
(6.) What is any different between what he did and I did, other than that you and he are apparently allied somehow together ?
(7.) Anyone who is ignorant of Cass Sunstein's official COINTELPRO agent provocateur recommendations these days (to invade sites like CD and sow disruptive divisiveness), is demonstrating a level of ignorance that is quite beyond what a seemingly well educated person would understand or have exposure to. Either you are more ignorant and misinformed than I thought, or you're acting deceptively, claiming that apparent subversion is more likely merely difference of opinions and hotheaded passion, per you own comments (Feb 12 2012 - 11:38pm):
"Vigorous debate is not destructive. …your sneering and condescending characterizations of those with whom you disagree … most definitely are destructive and divisive"
Really ?
So EXACTLY when does purposeful deceit become "Vigorous[ly] …destructive" ?
In your mind, was bush the lessor lying about WMD (leading to multiple War Crime violations against the peace of Iraq, millions dead and afflicted, & trillion$ wasted) "destructive" ?
Perhaps you believe that the debate about Iraq's WMD, was not "Vigorous" enough ?
(8.) No I'm in no manner some "Grand Inquisitor," but I have little patience to tolerate purposeful deception and divisiveness (as we seem to agree somewhat about), and my right to free speech is exercised to stimulate discussion about those who attempt to act that way (like PJD, who you implicitly defend).
(9.) Why do you not clear the air EXPLICITLY, and indict ALL posters making BLATANT accusations about embedded agents, particularly like PJD, as divisively "sabotaging the community here" ?
Like when he claims of lanista: "You are a dupe, or an agent, purveying the oldest COINTELPRO tactic…"
Where's PJD's "wiggle room" that lanista may be merely ignorant and making talking points that he sincerely believes in ?
(10.) It appears that PJD and I at least have in common the precept, that agents actively exist here on CD to influence opinions (propaganda), whilst you act as if that were completely implausible and ridiculous.
Particularly when your explanation (Feb 13 2012 - 12:51am), is that there is no conspiracy or paid agents "working against our best interests." :
"It is all about feelings and beliefs, invisible interior states, and so it is personalized and individualistic."
Oh really, when did is EVER stop being about corporatist influencing govt in making the most money, and 'greed at any cost' ?
Do you really WANT US TO believe that you BELIEVE that corporate mouthpieces disrupting and invalidating free speech cohesiveness and solidarity, are really "all about feelings and beliefs," as if rapacious usurpation and control were irrelevant ?
Sorry, you lost me.
Yeah, counting to ten and answering simple questions, is somehow seemingly beyond your ability to support understandable, reasonable, and open discussion here on CD.
Actually, I'm glad that I supposedly "lost" you -- because that thereby sets a new bar of what level of basic reasoning and authenticity that you apparently allow yourself to support. That is, when it's convenient to you
I'm surprised that you're not ashamed of play acting as being so incapacitated, which is often used as a simple-minded tactic to evade and deny the inevitable, or as an attempt to gain sympathy.
Your inability to respond to misquoting me, is that something that you also "lost" ?
Basically, your being lost and confused is your issue, as it is NOT my job to un-confuse and to FIND you.
My being clear in my posting is likely clear enough to others, and in fact, I wrote my response to those interested in better understanding manipulative techniques.
Your feigned and obsequious "sorry" is hardly appropriate or understandable, other than as a failed attempt to have people feel some sort of pity, for the situation that you are in.
As if I were supposedly merely ranting illogically and w/o any reason or validity, and that you condescended to let others know to avoid such (e.g. fatherly advice, don't get lost here).
I might apologize for your lost & sorrowful state, if there was a shred of evidence (or response) that I've written something that actually hurt you -- but I sincerely doubt that.
I would let it go.
I simply have no idea what you are talking about. That is not a crime.
We don't know each other. Your write as though we do. That is a little strange.
Perhaps you had discussions with me while you were using a different user name? You write as though we have a history. I am not aware of that, though your style of writing is vaguely familiar.
I am not "in a lost and confused state." I just can't follow what you are saying.
Yes, surely you would "let it go" -- as you've already done -- much like a calm-explosive passive-aggressive attack.
Your sickening patronizing tone and pointed barbs, are hardly evidence of being somehow confounded.
And doing that is similarly not a crime, but the messy details are fairly obvious to anyone interested in looking.
Does your pretense and tactic of acting at least one and likely 'two down' (dumber), interfere with your screen name's numeric value ?
I'm not at all worried that your being "lost" in attempting to "follow what [I'm] saying," is likely a permanent condition.
Especially, with your claim that this supposedly is a case of "CAN'T … follow," when actually 'WON'T … follow' is far more likely.
You certainly are an object lesson on how "one can lead a horse to water …," except when the horse supposedly gets so easily lost … and is unable to follow, or be lead at all.
Yes, I've found that you're not lost at all …
You're simply just unwilling to be answerable and responsible.
And yes, even that is not a crime.
I did a Google search on the words you use to describe Moore here and it brought up dozens of right wing sites.
I go by his house all the time. It is not in a gated community. Nor is he "looking out." I see him on the street in town, and chat with him. He is active and visible in the community. He gets a lot of death threats.
He brought a film festival to town, restored the old theater and offers free movies all the time, and is often there in person to talk politics with us. He premieres all of his films at a theater in a small town near here for the local people, with no media or fanfare. I never see him with an entourage, although he does sometimes have a couple of guys "watching his back" in a very low key way. Given the hate mail and death threats, any security or isolation from the public he has is pretty mild. His film production company is in an old building on the main street of town.
I don't think he has a "corporate jet" or a limousine.
I can't imagine anyone less changed by being a celebrity.
Thanks for your posts, Two Americas, just to set the record straight.
Several of us who post at CD admit to support of Obama in 2007-08, and it turns out this was a gamble that we lost. Yes, Obama's been a huge disappointment, but there is not a word on Obama in this pro-labor reflection. I enjoyed reading it.
Michael Moore continues to be a lightning rod who brings out the CD trolls, much like those who criticize Congressman Kucinich.
Bill in Dubuque
Thanks for a fine article, Michael Moore, and thanks for your decades of service to the progressive cause. You have been one of the few very successful creators of effective white (true) propaganda aimed at working class folk that attempts to inform them of their situation and to foster solidarity among themselves. That you have found yourself affluent is because you were able to use the corporate media in an effort to reform the corporate state. Your prosperity is proportionate to the popularity of your unfailing dissemination of the progressive message. Finally, I can hardly express enough admiration for your brave, selfless act when you received your richly deserved academy award. Would that your "left" detractors had a tiny fraction of the cojones that you had that evening, just days after the start of the second Iraq war with the nation in full war psychosis, when you denounced the Bush administration and the war in no uncertain terms to an audience of many millions around the world, risking career and life and limb. You are a hero, sir.
Tony Vodvarka
Hope to see M. Moore work up a piece on the Spanish industrial cooperative model of Mondragon - http://www.yesmagazine.org/new-economy/2012-the-year-of-the-cooperative
We have a generalized question, why do many of the most media empowered figures left of center FAIL to repudiate OilyBomber? And repudiating a violent fascist imperialist in no way equates with accepting the viability of partisan politics, its a statment as to an individual, just as repudiating any other historical figure such as Franco, Nixon, Stalin, or Thatcher does not imply any acceptance or rejection of a electorial process.
Why must you impose this Vatican-Galileo-like "purity" test on him? Moore has criticized the Obama Admins. positions many times. Go to his website.
My question is still a general question as to why so few of the most prominent left of center spokespeople do not plainly state that Oilybomber is too criminal too preside over any nation. Comparing this to the inquisition begs the question and avoids a productive answer. I think Starkraving has come closest to an answer, is we all balance our politics with our life circumstances. I do believe our compasses should align with those who are unable to speak basic truths aloud. Many spokes people do name Oilybomber for what he does, why not the others. Silence is complicity, remember the "good Germans"? If I said why did not Mrs. X , Soviet citizen , speak out as to who Stalin was during his death reign would that be an inquisitional question? Of course not and the simple honest reply would be citizen Mrs. X feared being killed by Stalin, not that the question was reviling in idealogical purity. Its the same as asking why did not Mr.Y oppose the Iraq war. If Moore or Nader has stated that Oilybomber is unfit to run for office or should be incarcerated ( I would be happy to read such) then I will acknowledge that they are leaders with coherant viable messages, not to be catalogued among those with untenable partial solutions.. And as far as the electoral process it has degraded tremendously since the great Fredrick Douglass, corps have an almost total lock on all branches of feds.
"Too criminal too preside over any nation" is a silly statement. Obama is perfectly fit to run for office. That is the problem.
Which figurehead happens to hold the office at any given time is not what is important.
Wealthy and powerful interests had just as strong a "lock on all branches of feds" in the 1850s as is the case today.
We agree on everything as far as politics as I do with Moores solution of unions and organize and I should hope Occupy. Again I know the electorial system is defunct( I believe more than ever in USA history, so I go further than you in declaring partisan politics defunct). And Oilybomber is a stooge, but I still do not see how this releases the Left pundit from announcing that OilyBomber should be incarcerated.This is a matter of speaking in favor of justice. This is absolutely necassary because it will disillusion very many supporters of these pundits who will vote for Oilybomber thinking the USA still has a democracy. You say Moore does not believe in partisan politics , as is futile, but as far as I know he still supports the federal democratic party. I believe you will keep making excuses for Moore and others instead of simply stating they are fearful of such and such or I believe they may fear some reprisal. This is not a horrible admission we all fear things its the denial of the fear that is harmful.
I am not "making excuses" for Moore.
While Moore - a person who is not involved in partisan electoral politics and for whom that is not a focus - is attacked, we have everyone from the DSA to the CPUSA to Kucinich to Sanders, and virtually every liberal and progressive pundit - all of whom are primarily focused on partisan electoral politics - consistently endorsing the Democratic party.
The people in power, and the right wingers, hate and fear Moore far, far more than they do any of those I mentioned above, and more than they do Nader or the Green party, and with good reason. Moore's mistake, in my view, is not that he fails to move toward the Green party or Nader, toward the progressive and liberal work-within-the-system and "restore America" crowd, but rather that he moves too far in that direction. He should move away from partisan electoral politics altogether.
As is often the case, Moore's essay is both narcissicistic and an advertisement for his work, which is fully the right of any free marketeer.
What is troubling about the piece, however, is a nostalgic, sentimental and provincial rewrite of history -- a practice too common among liberals.
E.G.: "...on February 11, 1937, the day the Flint workers won their struggle. And for the next 44 years, working people everywhere got to own their own homes, send their kids to college and never worry about going broke if they got sick."
WORKING PEOPLE EVERYWHERE is a slight overstatement. Obviously, it fails to recognize the plight of workers outside US borders. They simply don't exist in this story. The US imperial machine has not been overly kind to them.
Even worse, the piece fails to recognize the harsh realities of the majority of non-union workers in the United States -- and even many unionized ones -- especially people of color and immigrants.
The great American Dream that Moore pays such homage to has always been a numerical and historical myth.
Post-1937, millions of black workers in the South remianed literal slaves and the majority of white workers were slightly better off.
Immigrants to the US and Mexican Americans have been exploited for generations without the benefits of the Dream.
The original peoples of the Western Hemisphere who survived centuries of genocidal attacks continue to struggle mightily.
The US environment and the natural environment of the Earth lay in waste because capitalist consumerism fueled The Dream.
Even professional workers, the vast majority of whom are white, lived by the seats of their pants until unionized public sector employment picked up in the 1970s after unions surrendered in the private sector.
Nearly all gains that were won through brutal struggles like the 1937 autoworkers uprisings have been reversed.
There is no problem with dreaming The Dream or any other. But it is wrong to confuse dreaming with reality if you are serious about changing reality -- especially when life on this planet -- human life and other kinds -- faces extinction.
"Its called the American Dream, because you have to be asleep to believe it."
michael moore is on the same arc of transformation in how he views the world, politics and solutions as any of us posting on this site have been. rejection of and commitment to change a socially predominant worldview does not happen overnight.
our personal stories are usually a mixture of balancing perceptions of wider truths with actual circumstances in our lives. there is no formula for successfully working to allign our circumstances with that perception. in my own case, it's been a long road, as i suspect it has for most others.
Very good Stark, but go deeper. We, and me, have our ignorances, misconceptions, prejudices and fears but as activists we need to push the movement forward and if our most media empowered spokespeople are silenced by something we need to discover what is silenciing these powerful people. I find it difficult to believe that many of the left of center people such as Moore,and Nader do not realize that Oilybomber is a criminal unfit to preside over any nation ( this is no comment on the electorial system or duopoly). For me one must eradicate any illusion among one's followers that it is acceptable to vote for OilyBomber, failure to do so is a glaring ethical omission. We need to know the cause of this omission if we are to improve the left media dialogue and education and thus the health of the planet. This is not a matter of being for or against Moore etc. its about creatin g a more powerful movement, where spokespeople speak the Complete truth as they know it to power, not partial truths.
all well and good. truth to power, yes. but you say there is a larger point here: that when moore or anyone who has attained that stature fails to utilize their broader stage upon which to proclaim "the truth," in a sense they have sold out.
i believe my original point is still valid. success or fame or fortune or intelligence doesn't change the mitigating circumstances surrounding individual transformation, and the degree to which it unfolds. in fact, success, fame, etc. can often throw a wrench in the works, as there is more personal identity invested in the status quo.
Agreed your point is valid, I am trying to get Moore supporters to acknowledge that to even to be considered on the left in todays USA one must repudiate the democratic party( which is right of center) and call Oilybomber out for what he is a war criminal as is Bush. If Moore called Bush a war criminal why in the name of honesty not OilyBomber. Also federal electoral process is irredeemable. Why allow your supporters to waste their energies on fed electoral processes? I do not believe Moore is not intelligent enough to know all this, I believe he is compromising and in honesty his supporters should just make the simple admission Moore is compromising instead of making convoluted excuses. Perhaps it is neither Fear nor ignorance, but if people need to cling to personalities rather than honesty we are not making progress. Later as this world devolves deeper into fascism may be too late for anyone to speak truth, so NOW is the time to speak.
moore is an incrementalist. a "lesser-of-two-evilsist." while many have come to see the futility in this approach to change, it is still quite common - especially among the more recent "radicalized."
whatever he should know by now, or how easily those who see value in his work can forgive this "transgression," it changes little as regards the individual nature of healing and transformation. moore cannot escape the forces we are all subject to, and eventually he will find himself with no other option than to reject partisan politics as an effective mechanism for wider social change.
Hello! 1:35 was not a rhetorical question, please a reasoned reply from Moore's, etc.'s supporters otherwise we are only left with the fear factor.
Thank you Mike. I had an epiphany yesterday that it is time to forget all the mistakes our ancestors made, and remember the smart things they did and get in the morass of current mistakes and try our damndest to fix.
BTW, some of you seem to take great delight in putting words and concepts out there as if you know what Mike is thinking. Wow, are you that smart you know another's mind? Stop being so awnry and look at how much good Mike has done. If you didn't watch his movies, you wouldn't know squat.
There is no hope for liberals. We can't even get together to thank Michael Moore for going to bat for us.
Ever wonder why the left has been wandering in the political wilderness for the last 30 years? Comments posted on CD should give you a clue -- and a glimpse of our fate for the next 30.
Circular firing squads are the preferred form of entertainment here. They don't get us anywhere politically, but they do make us feel oh-so-superior to the countless others who are not as politically enlightened nor as ideologically pure as we are.
If only everyone were as perfect as we.
So, Sticks, we should settle for the lessor of two evils, eh? Haven't we been doing that for years. Where has that gotten us?
We want and need a third party and will promote it positively at every turn. Moore represents the status quo. He can't even "go there" in condemning the outrageous policies of Obama.
Where is his movie about Obama's Presidency entitled, "Bush redux, and Moore."
No need to "wonder" anymore, SticksInMyCraw.
Your own screen name describes how i feel about your twisted agenda.
Your own example provides (for those of us aware) evidence of the purposeful DIVISIVENESS and deceit, promulgated by those insincerely acting as if progressive, in order to subvert and invalidate the true processes we share.
Agent provocateurs are the one's symbolically arranging the left into circular patterns, and until we let the bullies and disruptors know that they'll no longer be tolerated, we will fight too much against each other.
Yes, we must learn to be inclusive and tolerant of everyone's differences, but that doesn't include embracing those traitorously dedicated to destroying our solidarity, cohesiveness, coherency and encircling us to claw, shout, and supposedly shoot at each other.
Sure, I can even forgive those economically devastated taking jobs as agent provocateurs here on CD -- but that hardly means tolerating their undermining of my right to free speech.
SticksInMyCraw and so many of his fellow conspirators being paid to lie and manipulate, is in no manner a superior form of free speech -- and it's hardly free -- is it ?
Please do attempt to avoid collectivizing your own meticulously crafted deception, as if everyone were taking place within it.
No it's not "our fate," no real people are not part of the "us" you conflate as "get us anywhere politically," nor is anyone "as perfect as" you. It sickens me that your Machiavellian messages both impugn and denigrate us all, as if somehow supposedly everyone else is actually like you prove yourself to be.
Only a deceitful person would lump together all of the extreme divisiveness seen on CD, and not only presume that it is all honest and sincere -- but then actively attempt to promulgate such as a means of propaganda, as if it we're truly representing deep divisions and unresolvable conflicts (while creating and exaggerating such).
How many people these days, would ever agree that everyone on CD is posting sincerely and w/o any agenda ?
PEOPLE
Learn to support your fellow progressives, as in those that share your beliefs.
Learn to deny cyber bullies any credibility and influence, by calling out their apparent deceitfulness and deceptions.
We can no longer afford to either ignore nor deny the presence and destructive actions of those bullies dedicated to the opposite ends and means of this forum.
Bullies disappear when confronted with sincere and honest questioning, but are sickly strengthened when most merely ignore their hurtful, corrosive, and divisive throwing of sand into OUR progressive gear-works.
I rest my case
Hardly so, unless you equate and conflate agent provocateurs as if somehow in that category you originally posted and described as (being authentic) "liberals."
Or is you short response a validation of the underlying issue of deceptive practices, that subvert the entire debate and concept of what IS a liberal and/or progressive point of view ?
Are we "liberal" enough in our interpretations, to self-destructively accept and enfold those working against our best interests ?
Disagreeing with you does not necessarily mean "working against our best interests."
There is little agreement about the "concept of what is a liberal and/or progressive point of view." That would be true regardless of whether or not anyone were trying to subvert the debate.
The debate is easily subverted because so many of the positions called "liberal" or "progressive" are contaminated with premises and assumptions that are shared by the right wingers, hence they carry within them the seeds of their own destruction. The concept of what is or what isn't liberal or progressive is shaky because those political stances are based on personal belief, and so naturally everyone has a different idea about that and can defend their idea as their belief and that cannot be challenged. Anyone can call themselves a liberal or a progressive. It is virtually meaningless. There are no objective criteria or standards. It is all about feelings and beliefs, invisible interior states, and so it is personalized and individualistic.