Last night I sat in my room and watched a few films. One of them was Michael Moore’s latest – Capitalism: A Love Story. Like most Moore documentaries it had its moments of cheese, but it also had its moments of clarity. Unfortunately, when it comes to Moore, he is such a polarizing figure that such moments of clarity tend to be lost on those that dislike him. If anything, there are a few points made in the film that are extremely noteworthy, and in saying that it’s important to remember that you don’t need to see the film to understand their true gravity. In fact, you shouldn’t need to see the film at all to comprehend the severity of its more important points (at least one would hope).
The first is that Moore cites a Citigroup document in which the term “plutonomy” is employed to basically detail a rather old concept. Those responsible for penning the document obviously concocted the term, given that in Greek ploutos means wealth, so they simply added “nomy” on the end to, I would imagine, evoke the term economy, thus somewhat distancing it from the base principle from which it was lifted – plutocracy, a form of government in which control of said government is determined by the ability to economically influence it. In truth, the United States has been a plutocracy since its inception – you don’t need a Citigroup document to provide that realization, nor is the revelation that a small percentage of those that have the ability to economically influence government new in the American experience. Thus, to claim that there was a time when the people’s ability to exercise their democratic right to vote seriously determined the conscience of government is naïve. Politics has, and always will be, power. And power in our world is defined by two historically unalterable elements: military and economic superiority. Combined, they represent the most successful mechanism of control in human history.
The second ‘revelation’ that should not be overlooked is that nowhere in the Constitution of the United States is Capitalism defined as a quintessential part of the national apparatus. As Moore points out, especially given how moronically the term socialism has been tossed about by right-wing pundits of late, the Constitution reads more like a Socialist script than one bent on promoting Capitalism. Mind you, that’s rather ironic given that the majority of those responsible for its creation were, in their day, rather wealthy men.
Third, the fact that those nations defeated during the Second World War adopted systems of government in which far more regulatory control exists with regards to the private sector and how the economic boom of the 50’s was inevitable given that global competition basically did not exist, thus confronting the now sacred maxim that American determination is capable of overcoming all obstacles. In truth, if the US auto industry is used as an example, the resurgence of the auto industries in both Japan and Germany directly led to the decline and eventual collapse of the American auto industry. Mind you, those at the helms of the Motown three weren’t forced to deal with the devastation that their employees were.
Fourth, that Moore included a portion of President Carter’s Crisis Of Confidence speech made on July 15, 1979. In it, Carter said the following…
“Too many of us now tend to worship self-indulgence and consumption. Human identity is no longer defined by what one does, but by what one owns.”
Imagine a President daring to say that on national television today.
Fifth, that Moore outlined FDR’s Second Bill Of Rights…
“This Republic had its beginning, and grew to its present strength, under the protection of certain inalienable political rights—among them the right of free speech, free press, free worship, trial by jury, freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures. They were our rights to life and liberty.
As our Nation has grown in size and stature, however—as our industrial economy expanded—these political rights proved inadequate to assure us equality in the pursuit of happiness.
We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. “Necessitous men are not free men.” People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.
In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all regardless of station, race, or creed.
Among these are:
The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the Nation;
The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
The right of every family to a decent home;
The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
The right to a good education.
All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.
America’s own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for our citizens. For unless there is security here at home there cannot be lasting peace in the world.”
Democratic socialism. Who would have ever thought.
December 7, 2009