[KurtFF8]

It's certainly not every day that TV spots that are overtly critical of the capitalist mode of production that include a soundbite of someone saying "people will eventually rebel" or interviews on the main TV news and entertainment shows discuss whether or not Capitalism is evil or not.

Michael Moore has accomplished this feat through his new film "Capitalism: A Love Story" which serves as a cinematic comedic critique of Capitalism. This week he's been on a media tour, from the Democracy Now! to Larry King discussing how he feels that Capitalism is an undemocratic system that needs to be replaced with economic democracy for "the people."

Some on the left are quite quick to dismiss this film and this coverage of it as another "liberal stunt" of Moore's, but the more I see him talk, the more I'm convinced that he is certainly a fellow leftist. He was even asked by Amy Goodman on today's Democracy Now! whether he was a Socialist or not, and he simply brushed off the question as irrelevant. (He had previously suggested the workers have ownership over the means of production, but in a tongue and cheek way that could be interpreted a number of ways).

This criticisms of Moore seem to be quite premature and based on the fact that he has previously seemed to many to be a reformist liberal who isn't "revolutionary enough." If one is to listen to Moore directly, he claims that he has always felt this way about Capitalism and that the current crisis has given him an opportunity to "finally talk about it" (DN! Interview). Even if this were not true and his previous stance was indeed that of a liberal reformist, why would we not welcome this new change of mind of his? Is that not the entire point of the left..to open people's eyes to the system they live in? I can certainly understand the skepticism about this film before it has come out, but the more I see him talk about it and the more interviews I see certainly show that this film is a good thing for the left. Its' central thesis is that Capitalism is an "evil" that cannot be reformed.

I've yet to see the film, and what I plan on doing when I do (and I suggest this to other leftists who are involved in organizations) is to go distribute a flyer or two about an upcoming event or at least an organization that people can become aware of. If people really do get "riled up" after seeing the film and we can present them with an actual venue to express/take action, why not do it?

[ThereBeDragons]

I would hesitate before calling Michael Moore mainstream. I have never seen any of his films, but the impression I get is that only far-left American Democrats (as in, far-left for an American Democrat) and other fringe elements take him seriously, because he is too deliberately inflammatory for centrists and rightists to engage him seriously.

[HoniSoit]

Michael Moore has 'moderated' and 'dumbed down' a lot of left-wing ideas in his films. Whether that is his intent to appeal to a wider public, or he is really very moderate and not sophisticated is really difficult to say, and in a sense matters very little.

Anyway, I heard that 'American Radical: the trials of Norman Finkelstein' is coming out. That's a documentary that is definitely worth seeing.

[ingliz]

and the more interviews I see certainly show that this film is a good thing for the left. Its' central thesis is that Capitalism is an "evil" that cannot be reformed.

That is not what I saw in an extended interview on CNN. Mr. Moore had nothing socialist say, except for the usual pusillanimous Fabian platitudes, even when given an opportunity to say it. As a typical 'third way' liberal he was promoting a call for a "better capitalism". At a stretch, you could say he was hinting at a Proudhonesque mutualism, but is that socialism? I think not.

[KurtFF8]

I would hesitate before calling Michael Moore mainstream. I have never seen any of his films, but the impression I get is that only far-left American Democrats (as in, far-left for an American Democrat) and other fringe elements take him seriously, because he is too deliberately inflammatory for centrists and rightists to engage him seriously.

I wasn't calling him mainstream, but was pointing to the fact that he's been all over the mainstream media with an anti-capitalist message.

Michael Moore has 'moderated' and 'dumbed down' a lot of left-wing ideas in his films. Whether that is his intent to appeal to a wider public, or he is really very moderate and not sophisticated is really difficult to say, and in a sense matters very little.

Absolutely, and as he has said in interviews about this film: this is the subject he has "been dancing around" for 20 years.

Anyway, I heard that 'American Radical: the trials of Norman Finkelstein' is coming out. That's a documentary that is definitely worth seeing.

I'll have to check that out.

That is not what I saw in an extended interview on CNN. Mr. Moore had nothing socialist say, except for the usual pusillanimous Fabian platitudes, even when given an opportunity to say it. As a typical 'third way' liberal he was promoting a call for a "better capitalism". At a stretch, you could say he was hinting at a Proudhonesque mutualism, but is that socialism? I think not.

The thesis of the film itself is that capitalism cannot be reformed and needs to be overthrown. Actually I have yet to see an interview with him about this film where he doesn't come to that same conclusion.

Naomi Klein also interviewed him, perhaps that will give some more insight.

[ingliz]

The thesis of the film itself is that capitalism cannot be reformed and needs to be overthrown

He was not calling for the overthrow of capitalism. American-style capitalism, yes, but he was not calling for the ditching of private ownership and the market economy - Capitalism. He did hint at a form of mutualism, but that is still capitalism, not socialism.

Anyway, to me, he seemed more interested in dodging Wolf Blitzer's questions rather than delivering a socialist manifesto, if that was his intention, which I doubt as I am sure he is still interested in the 'bottom line'.

[KurtFF8]

False, he is directly calling for worker ownership over the economy. There's even a big section of his film that focuses on worker run/owned businesses.

I suggest you read the interview with Klein that I posted.

[ingliz]

I have read the interview and my opinion has not changed.

He is not a socialist. Cooperativism, the worker as shareholder, is an ersatz socialism; it is capitalist.