Comments on: Michael Moore Kills Capitalism With Kool-Aid

By: anon Ymus

anon Ymus — Fri, 30 Dec 2011 04:45:58 +0000

—-Moore continues to BALK any mention of
our 4 decades of deliberate, ongoing Globalist RED
China set up, sellout and world TREASON.

He also refuses ANY deep background or examination
of the nature of inter-generational,
inter-national, unacountable USURY.

————————SEE ALAN WATT online.

By: Michael Covel

Michael Covel — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 01:23:46 +0000

“These folks explain fully why collectivism (more succinctly, Statism) does not and cannot work. It ALWAYS fails; it is just a question of when.”

Well stated.

By: MachineGhost

MachineGhost — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 03:53:11 +0000

“I heartily accept the motto — ”That government is best which governs least” and I should like to see it acted up to more rapidly and systematically. Carried out, it finally amounts to this, which I also believe — ”That government is best which governs not at all” and WHEN MEN ARE PREPARED FOR IT, that will be the kind of government which they will have.” [emphasis added]

– Henry David Thoreau, “On the Duty of Civil Disobedience”

By: Matt N.

Matt N. — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 20:12:20 +0000

Michael,

Your article has brought many out for comments; some thoughtful, some not.

I was surprised that no one here mentioned that Moore really is attacking something other than ‘free market’ capitalism. It can be called any -ism you like; it is a system enabled by global nation States; groups of people in power, writing regulations and rules which stack the game in their favor.

This system has been in place since recorded history; conquest and confiscation. When people try to be left alone and interact solely on moral and principled grounds, inevitably if they are occupying a space perceived of value or have produced anything of value, another group comes along and takes away their property (be it land, or the product of their labor). Currently, we have ‘soft tyranny’ where we are given the illusion of free choice/democracy; but, have any of you folks who are proponents of collectivism ever answered two questions for yourselves: 1. How is it morally right to take by force from some to give to others?
2. How much different is one vote in 300,000,000 from zero?

Read some Albert Nock, Ludwig von Mises, Friedrich Hayek, or even more famously, read some of Thomas Jefferson’s writing in the early 1800′s. These folks explain fully why collectivism (more succinctly, Statism) does not and cannot work. It ALWAYS fails; it is just a question of when.

By: Andy

Andy — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 23:11:07 +0000

There is a difference between capitalism and free enterprise which seems to have been lost in these discussions. Capitalism, without sufficient controls, concentrates wealth and power in too few hands and is disastrous in the long run.
Here’s is something I snatched from the reddit.com site:
————-
The opposite of capitalism is socialism.

2) Capitalism and freedom do not go hand in hand. Pure capitalism essentially leads to feudalism. Monopolies control everything and people are enslaved to them.

3) The left can never lobby causes the way the right does because of 2 reasons. The first reason is that all the money is in corporatism and corporations require the freedom to do whatever they want when it suits them. The second reason is the ignorance among Christians and the ability to mobilize them like sheep can never be matched.

4) Capitalism has never been proven to provide real prosperity to the population except in small tax havens. What works is capitalism mixed with socialism and the best systems are the ones that find the right balance. What the Cold War proved is that perverted pseudo communism can’t compete with a mixed economy and democratic system. What the post Cold War years have proven is that letting corporations do what they want is just as disastrous if not more so than what the faux communists were.

While Moore is a hypocrite and lives rich off criticizing capitalism it doesn’t change the fact that our system is fundamentally broken and doesn’t just need tweaks; it needs radical change.

By: Emmett Grogan

Emmett Grogan — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 21:05:07 +0000

Who here has read all of “Capital Vol. I, The Grundrisse, The German Ideology,” any of Marx/Engels fully? Do you know what the Labor Theory of Value posits, what surplus value is? Please, On 9/25/09 on Democracy Now, Michael Moore stated he has NEVER read ANY Marx, any. Imagine presenting say, a film titled “Gravity”, and never reading Newton,”Relativity”, never reading Einstein,”Democracy” and never reading Plato’s “Republic”, this valuable film is a caricature, hardly definitive but a wonderful film, a digestable sketch of a deeply pernicious systemic ideological and material exploitation of the many , 90%, by the few 1%. Grandest theft is all history.

FDR’s “Second Bill of Rights” speech first presented as thesis of “Guiliani Time” released theatrically in 2006. Go to GuilianiTime.com

By: Michael Covel

Michael Covel — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 19:07:11 +0000

Dave, not following that comment.

By: Dave

Dave — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 06:46:35 +0000

Coval- Libertarian huh? How does that Allen Greenspan Kool-Aid taste now. You know you can take the boy out of the cult but you can’t take the cult out of the boy.

By: Michael Covel

Michael Covel — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 01:55:17 +0000

One last thing Ron, it was not an intelligent conversation. They were good questions by Maher and as expected answers by Moore — idealistic to the point of fantasy.

By: Michael Covel

Michael Covel — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 01:53:00 +0000

Bill Maher does his share of a** kissing, but calling the film Moore’s opus, which he did, is quite different than the actual interview with Moore where Moore rambled on unable to answer the questions posed by Maher. Watch it again Ron. In fact, post the transcript. Maher was not advocating at all Moore’s silly proposition to end capitalism.

Lastly, petty personal attacks as a means to argue against my position…well observers see your effort for what it is.