“Roger and Me” came out 20 years ago and made Michael Moore a sort of populist hero. It’s hard to imagine now, but when he first came to our attention the pundits were comparing him to Mark Twain.
In these more politically charged times, no one compares him to Mark Twain anymore. This isn’t so much because he’s changed – the glib, hopeful, snarky core of his films, books and television shows has remained very consistent over time. What’s changed is the country around him. In the 20 years since he took on GM, America has become more polarized, more fearful, and more easily distracted. We don’t take as well to criticism or introspection. The populist, libertarian strain that once characterized the American political sensibility is more and more marginalized and replaced with a partisanship that resembles nothing so much as sports fandom.
This movie is not thematically or structurally different from his previous films. He makes humorous use of stock footage and corporate flacks in precisely the same way he always did. He leavens the process with silly stunts, like backing up an armored car to AIG, or wrapping yellow police tape around buildings on wall street. When he thinks we’ve had enough levity, he smash-cuts to the interviews and news stories that are the heart of his films. As always, the alchemy of that balance isn’t easy to get right. Moore has always tried to be the serious narrator and the comic relief – both Chuck D and Flavor Flav, so to speak. Those tonal shifts can be pretty jarring when they occur. I would put the grandstanding at slightly more than “Sicko.”
The main difference with this film is the scope of his attentions. It’s being billed as a movie about the financial crisis that began in earnest last year, but he doesn’t stop there. Instead of concerning himself narrowly with one particular economic disaster, Moore sets his sights on nothing less than American capitalism. In that way it’s very brassy – almost as if he’s trying to become impossible to finance.
The thesis of the film is that capitalism, at least in our current practice, has become incompatible with democracy, and is now therefore an evil that must be replaced. In its place, he suggests we use democracy not just as the foundation of our system of government but of our economy as well. That’s strong talk, and whether you come away convinced probably has more to do with how likely you think it is that you’ll one day be in the wealthiest few percent of Americans as any other ideological factor.
I’m sympathetic to several of his big ideas. I believe that the continued shrinking of the middle class imperils the peace and prosperity of our country, and that there is real peril when any economy becomes more about speculation and subterfuge than creation of value. I’m also not an advocate of any kind of capitalism that whittles away the safety net for individual citizens while providing an almost unlimited amount of bailout money for a particular class of giant, mismanaged corporations.
I won’t go over all of his arguments here- you really ought to check out the movie – but I will tell you the part where I got a little misty. There’s a clip of FDR, giving his State of the Union in ’44 with WWII in full swing. He lays out the country he wants to see us build at the war’s conclusion in what he called “The Economic Bill of Rights.” FDR’s vision is so sweeping, so generous and noble of spirit that it was hard to believe I was seeing an American president advocate for it. It felt to me like a window into an alternate future that we decided to abandon in pursuit of short-term personal gain. After decades of watching our presidents pander and flatter and play to our pettiest fears and resentments, it was galvanizing to remember what kind of ideals once animated our national debate, and what kind of enormous achievements we imagined for ourselves. It’s hard not to feel that we’re a smaller and poorer people now, however much junk we’ve managed to fill our garages with since then. Just try to imagine a president saying any of this now:
“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.”
source: The Public Papers & Addresses of Franklin D. Roosevelt (Samuel Rosenman, ed.), Vol XIII (NY: Harper, 1950), 40-42
12 How. 152: “Necessitous men,” says the Lord Chancellor, in Vernon v Bethell, 2 Eden 113 (1762), “are not, truly speaking, free men; but, to answer a present emergency, will submit to any terms that the crafty may impose on them.”
I thought there was too much grandstanding in “Sicko,” so I can’t imagine how he can squeeze more in. Still, MM’s movies continue to be enjoyably thought-provoking. They balance what Americans think of themselves with what the rest of us think Americans think. I’m looking forward to “Capitalism” for that reason, although I wish MM would take a (half) step back from his subject. The FDR clip is very powerful; he’s someone all Americans, all people, can be proud of. It reminds me of Eisenhower’s parting shot about the MIC – another piece of valuable advice lost in the mists of time.
Thanks for the review (especially the grandstanding warning), and I look forward to seeing the movie.
You write wonderfully well, and I find your review very accurate. Thank you!