Gerald R. Lucas

We watched Michael Moore’s Capitalism: A Love Story last night. It was what I expected. That’s why I like Michael Moore, I think. He is anti-establishment, iconoclastic, and just doesn’t take shit. This makes him hated by the right and provides a necessary counterpoint to the dominance of the radical right media, like Fox News. Here are some of my thoughts about Moore’s latest film.

Capitalism is the unquestioned, de facto economic system of the United States. It makes propaganda out of the belief that “all men are created equal.” By selling this idea to typical American citizens, it maintains the status quo: 5% of Americans have more wealth than the other 95% put together. Capitalists pay lip service to the American dream of wealth and prosperity — that, if you work hard enough, one day you just might make it, too. And the only way to make it is to embrace the system that has produced the world’s wealthiest people: capitalism.

Capitalism has turned America into a plutocracy, or rule by the wealthy. If you have any doubt, just look to the recent Supreme court decision that grants corporations even more power to influence the politics of this country. This debate is called “corporate personhood” and turns my stomach.

Moore illustrates how the capitalist system is amoral at best, and immoral in its routine practices. It upholds wealth over welfare. Its practices are counter-Christian, though ironically capitalism’s strongest proponents claim to be the most devout. Moore’s narrative even upholds the Catholic church as anti-capitalist, without going into their 2000 history of oppression. Maybe Bill Maher already made that film? Capitalism, like religion, is a mass delusion that helps only a few while hurting the majority.

Moore suggests that democracy might be a better economic model, or at least a more equitable one. One where the CEO makes the same money as the assembly line worker. Where all decisions are made my everyone that they will affect. Where all workers are treated the same, since they have the same stakes in the success or failure of the company. All are human beings with equal rights.

This sounds good, and just might work in economics where it has failed in politics. We Americans, perhaps as a result of capitalism, love money. The almighty dollar seems to be the measure of all success in this country. Therefore, when money’s on the line, people might pay more attention than they would when voting on some more abstract idea. Money is real. Politics are, well, not for most Americans. Democracy only works when citizens are engaged and educated about the issues and potential consequences of those issues on their everyday lives. If anything, much of America lives in the corporate fantasy world (PDF) of Fox News and MSNBC. No wonder democracy seems to be failing.

The best part of Moore’s film was the end, when he shows President Roosevelt’s last State of the Union address. FDR proposes the second bill of rights, perhaps the most progressive political statement I have heard from the twentieth century, and it was in 1944. It’s worth repeating in its entirety:

It is our duty now to begin to lay the plans and determine the strategy for the winning of a lasting peace and the establishment of an American standard of living higher than ever before known. We cannot be content, no matter how high that general standard of living may be, if some fraction of our people — whether it be one-third or one-fifth or one-tenth — is ill-fed, ill-clothed, ill-housed, and insecure.

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.

Can you imagine if Obama suggested such a thing today? Glenn Beck‘s head just might explode all over his chalk board. These rights are antithetical to capitalism, a system that has one goal: profit at any cost.

At one point, Moore implicitly asks the question: what’s wrong with socialism? Why does it seem to be so demonized in the media? In many ways, it’s what the defeated countries of the second World War received: constitutions that made the government on the side of the people, not of the corporations. Instead, we the people continue to support that which dehumanizes us and even profits from our deaths. When will it stop?

The film suggests that the election of Obama could be a turning point, but there remains doubt. I, for one, am dubious though hopeful. Can Obama really go against the corporate interests that helped get him elected? So far, it seems not.

Americans, what’s wrong with socially progressive political and economic policies?

I liked Moore’s closing statement, and I’m paraphrasing: I refuse to live in a country that allows such a flagrant disregard for the lives of others. And I’m not going anywhere. Can’t we do something?