MovieChat Forums > Where to Invade Next (2016) Discussion > Dumb people doesn't understand the docum...

Dumb people doesn't understand the documentary

posted 8 years ago by MrYipMan
15 replies | jump to latest

There seems to be a lot of people on this board who doesn't quite get the point of the documentary. Michael Moore invades countries to bring back good ideas, and good aspects of the countries he visits, that's it. The premise is not that he'll take everything from the countries back, like some seems to think he forgets. Only the good bits, to improve the american society.

I see a lot of people claiming he is lying and leaving stuff out, "not telling the whole truth". They just won't accept the message he makes about the states being a country with pretty big flaws for most of the people living there. He even sugarcoats everything and especially the ending so maybe, just maybe these dumb, ignorant people will at least listen, when what he probably really wants to say is that a lot of the people in the US is too damn dumb and ignorant and uneducated to understand and have a say about anything (but he doesn't because the red line in his documentaries is that these peoples are victims of the state who keeps them ignorant, which is absolutely true).

He doesn't have to point out that there are people in these "invaded" countries who don't approve of the subjects he talks about. He doesn't have to point out that these european countries and Tunisia have big problems because that is not the point. There is racism in europe, inequalities and even right wing populist parties gaining more and more power in a lot of european countries. You have to be sooo stupid and ignorant to think he hides this stuff, when he assumes the audience should know these things. That is his biggest mistake, assuming people with some kind of knowledge about the world are the ones who will watch it. But then if he had to spell out every little bit of everything for ignorant and uneducated americans then it would be too long wouldn't it? When these are things they should have learnt during those 12ish years in school, if they got real education and not multiple choice tests to score results for the rich owner. People's knowledge should serve to fill out the rest that he's not mentioning.

Great and funny documentary from Michael Moore, once again.

[–] Xavior_Penguin 8 years ago

You realize most people bítching about the half-truths and edited narrative are a small minority of both intellectual and pseudointellectual dorks with nothing better to do?

The vast majority of mankind leans towards feeling, not thinking. Throwing a million flat facts into people's faces is about the most tactless, least effective way to entrance them to new ideas.

In plain English, 'educating' people is the least effective way of actually educating them. People want their feelings tickled. They wanna be shocked, enlightened, allured and so on.

Propaganda is a specialized art and Michael Moore is well aware of this.

~Lance

[–] MrYipMan 8 years ago

thats the problem isn't it? you don't have to be 'educated' by someone or something, but a state shouldn't hide that gaining knowledge is something good. without this knowledge and critical thinking you're just a dangerous puppet. I'm not saying that you're now a puppet anyway, but without knowledge you're a dangerous puppet.

I agree about that most of us are "feelers" and not thinkers, and throwing facts at people isn't effective. However Michael Moore doesn't really throw a lot of new facts out there in this docu.

Of course it's the art of propaganda but doesn't make the points less true. The point is to weight his propaganda against the existing american propaganda, and see what makes sense.

[–] Xavior_Penguin 8 years ago

And that's what intellectual-leaning people will do. But in the meantime, the other 90% of peasants will not embrace these good ideas like equality and free healthcare unless it's been presented to them in a certain way.

Presenting it in a boring, scholarly way will not catch the majority's interest.

~Lance

[–] [email protected] 8 years ago

But in the meantime, the other 90% of peasants will not embrace these good ideas like equality and free healthcare unless it's been presented to them in a certain way.

Mostly because unlike the "intellectually-leaning" people, the "peasants" know that there is no free lunch. Or "free healthcare". There may be healthcare for which someone else pays, but that is not free. And by calling it "free" the "intellectually-leaning" people are propagandizing.

As for "equality", everybody is for "equality" but how do you make it happen? The "intellectually-leaning" people seem to think that somebody can wave a magic wand and all of a sudden everybody is "equal". The "peasants" know that it isn't that simple. For openers can you even define "equality" in a way that leads to effective action to bring it about?

[–] Xavior_Penguin 8 years ago

While this is not the thread to debate the effectiveness of health systems, the term is 'universal'. Free healthcare is colloquial. If you wanna get overly technical, saying nothing is free is redundant because... nothing is. So I think the important distinction is what's prohibitively expensive to the point that half the population can't afford simple, life-saving treatment and what's dirt-cheap and effective.

Not everybody is for equality, plenty of elitist fücks and their narcissistic ideologies they push are proof of that.

Either way, the topic of this thread is propaganda and the point of my 2 cents to it was that flat facts and scholarly presentations are only effective propaganda for a small minority of the population, not the peasant majority who need things sensationalized before they'll consider them.
I did not state a political position so if you wanna debate politics, start a new thread instead of hijacking this one.

~Lance

[–] Swe78 8 years ago

Great docu. The tragic part is that it not gona change how most americans think. I guess a very small percent even consider watch it. You actually can make America great again but I don't think mr Trump have the right agenda to make that change. I bet if he should comment on this film it probably would be something sarcastic. Or maybe say something terrible just to get wotes. With him you're doomed. But you will take many Moore... in the fall. But who gives a **** right?

Of course he didn't show the bad parts but why focus on details when the picture is quite clear?

Regards from Stockholm ;)

[–] ddx-725-400095 8 years ago

But he IS misleading and telling only parts of the story that fit his cause.

Take for example the Italian story about 13th salary. I have this 13th salary in Croatia, so although it might be different in Italy, I would assume it's pretty much the same. What Moore fails to mention in his documentary is that the 13th salary is meant to cover all your overtime hours in that years. Yes, that's right, if you have 13th salary, you are not allowed to write down your overtime hours every months nor are you paid for them monthly. You are obliged to work as much as the firm asks you, of course in limits of what law dictates regarding overtime, and then you get paid for this at the end of the year.

Collegues who don't have 13th salary are obliged to write down every hour of their overtime and are duly paid for it at the end of each month. The math comes to around if you have 7-8 hours of overtime monthly then it's better to not have 13th salary and get paid montly for it.

So it's not FREE additional salary. It is a pay for all the additional hours you've put during that year.

And when he drives the point that in the USA you don't have paid vacation he doesn't say if the average US pay is higher than Italian. Maybe US pays are larger because part of them is meant to cover this "unpaid" vacation?

Second topic that caught my attention is his Norway part of the story where he says "Norway has max 21 year sentence" and then follows up with "Norway has the lowest crime rate". Implying the two are in direct corelation when in fact there are dozens of factors that are responsible for such a low crime rate and the max sentence duration has little to do with that. He fails to mention Norway low population density, norways high income rate, high literacy, good schooling system, all with aims of driving his point that the prison system is responsible for low crime rates.

[–] cinema-23561 8 years ago

The point is the best things people do in other countries turn out to be American Ideas that 50 yrs of corporate brainwashing has made Americans fear and see as foreign.

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] carlson_joseph 8 years ago

🗽🗽Just a wee,quibbling question? How many people are trying to break into these earth-bound Nirvanas as compared to people dying to come to the United States? Yes, other countries have wonderful ideas, but are undocumented people crossing into them by the thousands. The old song says :"With all your faults, I love you still. It had to be you. Wonderful you. It had to be you." Oh, by the way, I am referring to normal immigration practices, not the chaotic flooding into Europe by people fleeing war, famine, and genocide.

[–] tom-1674 8 years ago

Yes, other countries have wonderful ideas, but are undocumented people crossing into them by the thousands.

Have you picked up a newspaper or turned on a TV lately? Are you living under a rock? How can you possibly have not heard of the biggest immigration crisis in human history? Millions of people are streaming into Europe from the middle east because they're tired of having their homes blown to *beep* by the Americans and their willing allies. FFS, STFU and get a clue!

[–] rmcsharry-178-702888 7 years ago

Normal immigration practices, ok, here's some data and facts for you.

If you actually look at the statistics you will see that the vast majority of people trying to get into the States are from some of the poorest countries in the world, many from Third World countries, not from 1st World countries. Europeans are not 'dying to break into America'....for obvious reasons, because their standard of living is already high, they already have democracy, most freedoms and universal rights. People want to leave countries that do not have such things, or that have poor standards of living (or both). They try to go to America because America gives visas more easily than most.

What you find when you look at the numbers is that a huge number of US companies are sponsoring people from poor countries to come and live and work in the USA (almost always on below market salaries, so that they do not have to employ Americans on high salaries).

Guess who are at the top of the list of such companies? Tech giants - InfoSys, IBM, Google, Intel, Apple, Microsoft, Oracle.

Look at 2016 http://www.myvisajobs.com/Reports/2016-H1B-Visa-Sponsor.aspx

Take InfoSys, the number one spot for 2016 - over 33,000 visas. Where did they come from?

India(1195),United Kingdom(2),Canada(2),China(1),Sri Lanka(1),Jamaica(1),Peru(1)

IBM, at number 3:
India(535),Canada(49),China(29),United Kingdom(13),Germany(13),Mexico(12),South Korea(10),Israel(9),Taiwan(9),Turkey(8)

Since 1960, Mexico has been number one:
http://www.migrationpolicy.org/programs/data-hub/charts/largest-immigrant-groups-over-time

followed by a list of 9 3rd world countries or those with oppressive regimes. The remaining 40% is from the rest of the world.

Of course America doesn't really have much choice because the US economy is weak and the population is ageing. Quarterly profits come first....so why not get cheap foreigners year after year, when the visas expires send them home and replace them with more cheap employees. In the long run that is much cheaper than building and running the business on foreign soil - don't bring the factory to them, bring them to the factory.

[–] sonoftom 8 years ago

Great comment, to be honest I don't know how anyone could of missed the point. Unless they deliberately miss it to suite their own agendas.

I am the son of a man named Tom.

[–] danbiz-126-118517 8 years ago

they can't see the forest for the trees