This is a read-only archive. Find the latest Linux articles, documentation, and answers at the new Linux.com!

Linux.com

Re:Sophmoric drivel

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 14, 2004 04:07 AM
This post is full of it. Sophomoric drivel, that is.

Moore's "documentary" has been widely discredited as being full of lies, deceit, and untruths.

I have not read a single criticism of this film that credibly accuses it of lies. The worst criticism one can make is that it presents only part of the truth, something not unknown in political speech. I'd call this statement of yours name-calling with no factual basis.

His "Acadamy Award winning documentary" from a few years ago may have been given the award, but if memory serves, the award was later revoked because it was later realized that what he presented was not a documentary at all, but a fictional comedy framed around some tragic events and presented as a documentary.

Memory does not serve. It was not revoked. Further, there is no requirement that a documentary film be unbiased. Bias, in fact, is usually the motivation for making a documentary film. Perhaps you should see a few before deciding what the state of the art is. This statement is outright nonsense.

While you say that Microsoft has probably donated money to the Bush administration, in reality, most large corporations, with few exceptions, donate similar amounts of money to both major parties.

If, by "similar amounts" you mean in the same order of magnitude, then you are probably right. However, Republicans receive the lion's share of this money, as any visit to a site like Project Vote Smart will quickly show.


Moore's sophmoric rant which ended with a quote from George Orwell is nothing more than what Orwell himself described in 1945: The majority of pacifists either belong to obscure religious sects or are simply humanitarians who object to taking life and prefer not to follow their thoughts beyond that point. But there is a minority of intellectual pacifists, whose real though unacknowledged motive appears to be hatred of western democracy and admiration for totalitarianism. Pacifist propaganda usually boils down to saying that one side is as bad as the other, but if one looks closely at the writing of the younger intellectual pacifists, one finds that they do not by any means express impartial disapproval but are directed almost entirely against Britain and the United States


And here we have the old right-wing bullshit about anyone who disagrees with them - that they hate America and everything it stands for. [Forgive the obscenity, but the implication of the quoted paragraph is, to me, obscene.] If you knew anything at all about Michael Moore, you'd know that, whatever his faults, he is someone who loves his country and its people as much as anyone. He hates greed, corruption, and stupidity in aid of greed and corruption. He is more critical of America than of other countries, I think, because he lives here and stupidity, greed, and corruption in this country affects American lives more than stupidity, greed, and corruption in other countries. Is that such a difficult concept to wrap your mind around?

Personally, I find Mr. Moore to be rather irritating - grating at times. That's partly because he's so sure he's right, but partly because he is right much of the time.

What needs to be remembered in FLOSS advocacy is to make sure to not be completely one-sided, to maintain a full view of the facts, [blah, blah]

What you need to remember is that you haven't managed this yet, yourself.

I haven't seen this movie yet, but if the quality of its critics are any indication, it's bound to be terrific.

#

Return to Commentary: 'Fahrenheit' 98, 2000, and XP