Thanks to Hope from pointing us to this!

Adobe Flash Player not installed or older than 9.0.115!

The following is a critical review written in response to Michael Moore's new film, "Capitalism: A Love Story."

by Eric Ribellarsi

Let me start by saying there was much in this movie that was quite rare, and that I think ought to be united with. It is not very often that a popular movie in the U.S. says that the problem in society is capitalism, and opens up a conversation around that in the way that I think this movie likely will. Certainly it is also rare to see a popular movie in the U.S. that shows some of the awful and ugly workings of capitalism, like the housing crisis and the way capitalism grinds people up and leaves them to die. And certainly the movie is fun, and quite hilarious at times in ways that are provocative and that make the movie really accessible to people.

However, if we go through Moore’s entire critique of capitalism, nowhere in the entire movie is there EVER a discussion of the exploitation of labor in the “third world,” and what America’s wealth is actually based on. Moore begins the movie by juxtaposing the eviction of a family in the U.S. from their home, while showing the U.S. is one of the richest countries on the planet and that it ought to take better care of its people. Surely it is true that people in this country shouldn’t be ripped from their homes and thrown out on the streets to die; there is no question about that. But how can we talk about any re-distributing of wealth without ever even acknowledging where all of this wealth came from in the first place? I have to say… the positive aspects of this movie are ultimately ruined by American chauvinism in ways that are deeply disappointing.

Read more...

Houston theaters are showing Michael Moore's new film Capitalism: A Love Story starting this week. Over a thousand screens across the United States, a record for an independent documentary, are showing the new offering by the director of Sicko, Roger & Me and Fahrenheit 9/11, among other films. Some audience members are looking for reference material and resources to help understand Capitalism: A Love Story in today's economy. The FIRE Collective is providing to Houston/Galveston residents information on the question of capitalism that has been opened up by this film.

In the coming few days, we should develop an analysis of both Moore's critique of capitalism, and his proposed solutions.

by decolonize

The new film is Michael Moore's indictment of profiteering by the haves at the expense of the have-nots. Moore represents wide range of troubles in Capitalism: A Love Story, from foreclosures and evictions to the crumbling of major businesses to financial excesses among the wealthy. Moore provides plenty of statistics, research, interviews and news reports to give evidence to the assertions made in Capitalism: A Love Story, and the defenders of unrestricted free enterprise are feeling the heat.

The Glenn Beck crowd is already trying hard to defend capitalism gone wild, and has plenty of people to accuse for what Michael Moore exposes in Capitalism: A Love Story. They say a smaller government and privatizing the world is the solution. A smaller government, they reason, will ensure capitalism's abuses do not occur. But reducing government and its regulations has done nothing more than benefit the upper class, business owners and their friends. Capitalism: A Love Story brings this hypocrisy to light.

Read more...

On the 60th Anniversary of the revolution that brought about a socialist China, and inspired revolution all throughout the world, we are reposting a review of Mobo Gao's book, "The Battle for China's Past." We are posting this in the context of a smear campaign being directed against China's revolution by both the US and China's new capitalist government that came to power in 1976.

by Serve the People

Three decades of hostile mythology have lain like a fog over the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution and the man who initiated it, Mao Zedong.

At last, an important academic study of Mao-era China has come along, shining a light through the miasma of lies and distortions that begin with the “ten years of disaster” line of the Deng ascendancy, and continue through the publications of Jung Chang and Li Zhisui.

Professor Gao Mobo’s The Battle for China’s Past: Mao and the Cultural Revolution (Pluto Press, 2008) reasserts the validity of the Cultural Revolution and makes significant claims for its having benefited both China and the broad masses of the Chinese people. In the process, it dismisses the neo-liberal agenda of the restorationists inside the CCP and unmasks the reality of the growing divide between urban and rural China.

Gao claims that the rapid economic growth of the major cities in the coastal provinces, touted as a success for post-Mao reforms introduced by Deng and others, actually conceals the fact that “there are millions of people who are actually worse off since the post-Mao era reform years.” He says that gender equity has suffered setbacks after making significant gains during the Cultural Revolution, and cites education and health as two areas in which many of the rural population are now worse off than during the Mao years. And in any case, he claims, it is precisely the “enormous achievements made during the Mao era that paved the way for later development”.

Add comment (0)

Read more...