Michael Moore's "Capitalism"

I went to see Michael Moore's latest film, "Capitalism, A Love Story," last night. Like most of his films, it was an uneven but powerful mix of personal stories, history, ironic narration and community and personal action. You ought to get out and give it a look. Moore's thesis is split between two possible conclusions: that capitalism is either simply inherently immoral, or that it might be salvageable if the people democratically insist on making it work for them.

Moore begins by examining the constant drumbeat of propaganda for the American variant of capitalism, or at least the laissez-faire perspective on it. He then goes into the hypocrisy of companies that preached that principle but then when they got into trouble, turned to the regular taxpayers for hundreds of billions in bailout money. He spent a lot of time contrasting that with average families being evicted from their homes and farms on the principle of "let the buyer beware" free enterprise and predatory loans by the same financial institutions who took public money to overcome their own difficulties and used some of it to pay their executives (themselves) multi-million dollar bonuses.

Moore effectively went back in history to show his viewers a time, the 1950's and 60s, when marginal tax rates for the wealthy were as high as 90% and the standard of living for average working families and the provision of public amenities was generous. He played a speech from Franklin Roosevelt advocating the adoption of a "Second Bill of Rights" focusing on economic rights such as a good job at a liveable wage, a quality education, good affordable housing and health care for all, which would be accomplished, "after this war is finished." FDR died before the war ended, but Moore again points up the irony of how the American occupation administrations in the nations of our conquered enemies mandated all these provisions and democracy into the constitutions of Germany, Italy and Japan, and how the people of those nations have enjoyed these benefits as rights ever since, rights the people in the occupying power, the United States of America, do not enjoy for themselves.

Moore shows a few instances where people mobilizing together effect change for the good, such as a family backed by community organizers who refuse to vacate their home, and when the employees of Republic window and door faced down Bank of America and won. It is this kind of call for action Moore is openly championing by film's end. He even explores a financial industry document purportedly sent to major insiders saying that the gravy train for the rich will continue unless the bulk of the population uses their numbers to change the situation. The clear implication to the letter's well-heeled recipients is that that must never be allowed to happen. In many ways, Moore makes the point that the greedy few keep gaming the system so that they continue to gobble up a greater and greater share of the economy's output while the working and middle classes work harder and harder for a diminishing share. In many ways, his case is persuasive.

Moore wraps up rather theatrically, in his own inimitable style, with an appeal for the public to unite and take charge of their future by making the corporate, especially the financial industry, give the consumer a better break, be barred from arcane, non-productive and self-serving instruments such as derivatives and return a far greater proportion back to community purposes through heavier taxation. If you are a progressive you will enjoy the points and message of the movie. If you are not you know exactly what you will have to worry about in the next few years. Either way, it's definitely worth seeing.