6/26 Well, here is one person who thinks Michael Moore hates America, and
provides evidence to back it up:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/26/opinion/26BROO.html
\_ I have been told by conservatives that NYT is biased and op-ed
cannot be trusted.
\_ http://www.michaelmoorehatesamerica.com
\_ so, anyone who don't like Bush hates America? This is good shit.
It is the American version of what used to called "counter-
revolutionaries."
\_ Criticism is not hatred. People here are, on balance, under/un-
educated. We have a long track history of supporting despots and
utilizing third world labor at very low wages. We use our military
to protect our corporate interests around the world. Moore believes
these aspects are wrong, and speaks against them. You can argue
whether these aspects of our relationship with the world and among
ourselves make us stronger or not, but to say Moore "hates America"
because of these statements is a straw man. -scotsman
\_ If you ask any of these 'low wage' workers they will beg to be
'exploited' in order to earn a wage and feed their family.
The notion that third world societies can instantly propel
themselves to a first world standard of living only if they
were paid more is silly. ALL capitalist Western economies
progressed through requisite stages where workers endured
hardship. As long as the fruits of their labor are reinvested
in their economies, as they are where most US corporations
operate, and their societies nuture the political and economic
policies that promote growth (not socialism), they win. But
somehow I suspect you'd prefer a proletariat revolution.
With respect to supporting despots, this was an expediency of
the Cold War, which history unequivocally vindicates. One
only need compare S. to N. Korea and Chile to Cuba.
\_ Tell that to the families of 20,000 desaparecidos in Chile.
This is exactly the point. Your whole argument is based
upon the necessity of our (US) supremacy. Globalism based
on first world first is akin to regressive tax structure.
In the long run it's merely imperial, untenable. People
won't stand for it.
Also, I'm not suggesting that higher wages will fix the 3rd
world's problems. But rather than trying to control all the
resources from the raw material to the consumer, we could
work to foster entrepreneurship in these countries and have
an actual global market place with true local ownership.
Our country was granted a shortcut by history with the seeds
of our industry being sown under imperial rule. Fortunately
for us, England didn't have the war tech of a superpower. We
were able to buck them off, and now reap the benefits. This
new global economy is basically of the same imperial character
but with a seemingly insurmountable military force to back it
up.
Final point, no I don't prefer a proletariat revolution,
though I'm terrified that one could come in my lifetime.
I'd prefer that we learn from history and tread lightly in
the imperial snake pit. --scotsman
--Final final point. I really don't know where you pulled
the assertion that I was championing socialism from. You
need to watch the knee jerking if you want to have a decent
discussion.
\_ In response to the expidiency of supporting despots, you
should also think about the failures: the Shah in Iran
(we installed him and overthrew a democratically elected
prime minister leading to the current theocracy), Saddam in
Iraq, and others. |