Quote:
Originally posted by Oblivion437:
Also, Moore is a proven liar in the Goebbelsian tradition of lying. You tell just enough of the truth so that what comes out is a lie, but you're immune to factual cross-checking, and to say, it was "unethical and downright crooked to omit essential parts of a speech to lend a false impression" sounds fairly weak in comparison to "you made, from top to bottom a statement that was wholly false."
quote:
I think it overly trite when people who don't think the same way as others are named as people who don't love their country, or as an-American. It's like the number one dismissive pigeon hole - what do we do twith this guy - we don't like him and we don't like his ideas - how about we tell everybody he doesn't love the country - that will work.
|
I don't criticize the strength of his patriotism. He's a very American American, making a shameless buck in any way he can (charging the Columbine massacre victims admission to the preview puts a new patina sheen on the word shameless) even exploiting the deaths of innocent people and selling the image of America that closet self-haters have wanted to have on their plates to bite on for years...
[/QUOTE]Just about every political figure lies in "the Goebbelsian tradition of lying." It's true that Moore has been caught out in a few fibs, but that is to be expected of someone with an aggressive political viewpoint. However, the practice of shading or skewing the truth was in place long before Goebbels. As I believe I've mentioned in a post somewhere else, I think the custom of relating things that one doesn't like to Hitler or Nazism is not constructive.
Also, the value of Moore's work goes beyond the "shameless buck" that his detractors assume is his only motive. Biased as they may be, his "documentaries" stimulate discussions about what the truth is. As for selling a negative image of America, it's important for people to have confidence in their country and to be able to sift through what they are told. If a person's faith in their leaders and their country can be shaken by two hours in a movie theatre, maybe it's best they think a little more about the foundations of their trust. And if the closet self-haters latch on to this movie as everything they feared, so what? If they weren't smart enough to find about or develop similar ideas before, what kind of threat are they?
Regarding Moore charging admission to the "Columbine massacre victims", that would be quite a trick, even for him. [img]smile.gif[/img] I take your meaning, though, that he charged people who were at or injured in the shooting. Do you have supporting evidence of that? Did he know that those individuals would be present at that particular showing of his film?
In short, Moore already has enough faults to criticize; he doesn't have to be characterized as a heartless, traitorous money-grubber in order to be discredited, if that's what you want to do.