Micheal Moore Hates America

[skippyfetus]

Re: Micheal Moore Hates America

I just can't wait for the sequel: "Michael Moore hates God" from the creators of godhatesfags.com, lol  ;D

 

[Slapdragon]

Re: Micheal Moore Hates America

It is important for documentarians to understand the three basic ways of knowing that humans can develop and use. Those are objective, subjective, and intersubjective. Objective truth is that which can be duplicated from one tester to another. Although the Rashoman effect says that even objective truth is not alltogether objective (even the choice of subjects can be slanted), objective truth, which is the highest point of the documentary art, is truth which includes understandable operational definitions, and data sets that can be tested.

Objective truth is more or less attainable, and the proof is the computer you are typing on. It was invented and nurtured based on objective truth.

Subjective truth plays on the personal feelings and thoughts we each have. Each person has their own biased subjective truth. The enlightenment, which ushered in the modern era, was the beginning of the era of objective truth being considered king, and the end of the era when subjective truth was paramont. When someone says, "it is true because I say so" they are affected by subjective truth, and are actually digging back 400 years in humanities mental evolution.

Intersubjective truth is truth that, while subjective, finds a meeting of the minds without needing to be objective (although it can be objective). If I point at a wall and say "blue" and you look and agree, we have met the issue of intersubjective truth. Oddly enough, if scientifically the wall is "red", it does not matter, as long as we both thing blue and agree blue. This is part of the basis for post modern thinking.

Propaganda, as opposed to documentary, plays on subjective truth to change or reinforce someone's thinking patterns on a subject, without seeking an onjective understanding. In fact, intersubjective understanding, as long as the listener agrees with the propaganda, is the purpose.

Documentary seeks to develop an objective understanding. When it goes so far in this direction as to abandon story for objective understanding, it is often referred to as ethnographic (a term which cannot be used for nature docus).

 

[J.R. Hudson]

Re: Micheal Moore Hates America

[quote author=Ranger link=board=movies;num=1089249201;start=60#73 date=07/08/04 at 19:36:59]
No one is excusing the Germans for their role in allowing Hitler and the Nazi Party (no caps) into gaining power, however I think it’s too easy for us to now look back in time, point our finger and say “bad bad Germans”!  I don’t think the “evils” of the party and the sins of the German people were as obvious as many here would like to believe.  As a young lieutenant, 15 years ago, I lived in Bamberg, Germany and had many interesting and lively conversations with Germans, both old and young, into politics and Germany’s role in history during the 20th Century.  Like many here, I too was extremely critical of Germany’s complicity into the events that ultimately unfolded.  All of the Germans I have known have expressed a genuine regret and shame for what happened, but in 1934 those “evils” were not so clearly defined as they are today.  Sure, overtly racist books such as “Mein Kampf” had been around for quite awhile, but sadly at the time many Europeans across the continent were anti-Semitic and such a book only reaffirmed existing stereotypes of the day.  In context, this was no different from the attitudes expressed here in the US by many Southern whites towards their black neighbors.   How many of us here can remember in our not too distant past of “Whites Only” signs at restaurants, water fountains, and lavatories?  Additionally, the death camps (as we know them today) and the final solution were not carried out until much later.  The first concentration camp, Dachau (which I visited) was established a year prior to the making of the Reifenstahl’s movie (May of 1933).  It wouldn’t be until much later that the average German would realize its ultimate evil role and purpose.  Again, and I cannot stress enough, that I am not making excuses for Germany’s complicity in the killing of millions of innocents, but I wanted to illustrate that in context to the time the “Triumph of the Will” was filmed, such foresight into the reality of the Nazi (no caps) Party was no yet fully apparent.

I hope we can discuss this rationally.[/quote]

I can dig it Ranger. But lets not forget this was a book written by the leader of the country. Perhaps the Europeans had anti-sem attitudes but still no excuse for the time. When the Nazis (NO CAPS!) invaded Poland they immediatley set to rounding up Polish Jews (and others at that) and begun with the executions. The attrocities started right off the bat in 1939.

We can attempt to say "Well America had slavery..." and "Well even in the 50's and 60's America had blacks in segregation" but going back to the Civil War America (and Americans) did something about it (I know, more complex than the issue of slavery but definatley a layer in it) and in the 60's there were thousands of people involved in the Civil Rights movement.

This didnt happen in Germany. OF course we were'nt shot if we spoke out against it either