Michael Moore Goes After…Himself?

Last weekend, Michael Phillips and A.O. Scott reviewed, among other films, Michael Moore’s latest farce, “Capitalism: A Love Story.” I don’t know their track records or political leanings, but Phillips for one noticed that Michael Moore is growing tiresome. He didn’t mention the blatant hypocrisy of a multi-millionaire who has reaped the benefits of capitalism calling for its demise, but still, he’s getting tired of the schtick, which leaves me hopeful.

A.O. Scott raved about the movie, and I agree on one hand that Michael Moore has finally chosen the most logical topic for his kind of film. At least Michael Moore has the nerve to finally say it: he doesn’t like capitalism. It’s absurd, it’s ridiculous, it’s akin to Lieutenant Kaffee rising and sleeping under the very blanket of freedom that Colonel Jessep provides, then questioning the manner in which he, Colonel Jessup, provides it. I’m sure Goldman Sachs would rather Mikey just thank them and go on his way… but I digress…

Scott said something at the end of his review that made me mutter “typical liberal.” To paraphrase, he said that we should all see this movie even if we disagree with Moore. Again, I don’t know if he’s a liberal. He did say he wasn’t sure if he agreed with Moore or not.

My problem with this sentiment, even from someone who’s unsure of whether they agree with Moore or not, is that it fails to acknowledge that Moore’s work is propaganda. Furthermore, why do I need to see it? It’s just a movie. No one ever gets real serious and says to a liberal, “Even if you disagree with Ann Coulter, you should read her latest column.” And that’s what Moore’s movies are, commentary, the cinematic equivalent of a column.

Roger Ebert prefaced his latest Michael Moore interview with a similar disclaimer: “Whether or not you agree with Michael Moore, he has one piece of invaluable advice in his new film…” Moore goes on to explain derivatives and the stock market crash, and included in the interview is this non-sequitur:

One guy comes to the table and takes nine slices of the pie and everybody else at the table has to split the last slice. That’s not democracy; that’s not what Jesus said. All the great religions actually say the same thing, they all have the same basic beliefs about how to treat the poor and how the rich are not to suck everything up and make life miserable for everybody else.

There’s no real preface to this illustration, but a couple of things stand out to me. One, the illustration has nothing to do with Democracy. He’s confusing his targets here, and we’re not a Democracy, anyway. Two, he brings up Jesus. How come he gets away with that, and conservatives don’t?

My real problem with liberal attacks on capitalism, and I don’t need to see Moore’s MOVIE to know this, is that they’re not really attacking capitalism. They’re attacking greed. They say they want to regulate Wall Street, but they really think we can get rid of greed. This is, at best, naïve. Let’s regulate and eliminate lust, sloth, envy, pride, wrath, and gluttony while we’re at it. I know, Mike. That last one hurts, huh?