Canadian Sicko
Well, apparently I'm getting requests as to what to write about, in response to allusions. Fair warning: not so much on the sleeping last night, so articulate might not so much be my thing this morning.
The allusion to something I was going to write about, a few posts ago, was Michael Moore and this new movie "Sicko". I hesitate to criticize Moore, because honestly, it seems like the "in" thing to do among people who are kind of getting leftier-than-thou, but I do think his approach is really problematic. Now, I haven't seen Sicko, so anything I'm saying about it is based mainly on the copious numbers of blog entries and publicity I've seen on the subject.
I actually think Moore is probably the quintessential example of the guy who will bend principle in terms of his methodology if it's politically expedient, which is essentially exactly what I was frustrated with in that "rape as drain on the system" argument that I posted about. It's interesting to observe his efficacy, given that. Sicko, from what I understand, has been insanely effective in getting people who would otherwise immediately bristle and shut down the conversation at the words "socialized medicine", like you just said "Beetlejuice, Beetlejuice, Beetlejuice" or something, talking about the absolute insanity that is the American health care system. And he does it by de-othering the ones who are being hurt, by raising that level of empathy in his middle-class viewers to the point where they start to see how it could affect them.
But he also "others" foreign countries, generally in the opposite way. I've had a few conversations/arguments about the ways in which putting women on an artificial pedestal of "closer to God by way of being closer to Mother Earth" or, less airily philosophically, through "chivalry" is the flip side of the social misogyny coin, because it prevents them from being allowed to be fully human. They're still being split off and "othered". To an extent, I feel like that's what Moore does to other countries in several of his films. I think it's easy to see some of the additional problems when we're talking about Cuba, but I hate his approach to Canada as well.
Here's the cutting to the chase on Michael Moore and his attitude toward Canada, and I assume other countries--I don't think he gives a damn that he's being inaccurate. I respect that he's a polemicist and whatever is outside the scope of his polemic is irrelevant to him. But just to be absolutely clear, I don't know anybody who's ever lived in Toronto who leaves their goddamn doors open and doesn't fear violence on any level. I think everyone knows that it's an enormous oversimplification to say that Canadians are uniformly thrilled with our health care system. What's worse for me is that the only thing I've really seen bring out, shall we say, hard core Canadian exceptionalism, is Michael Moore and the way he gives such publicity for the contrast between Canada and the US on exactly the things we want to distinguish us.
We as Canadians are way too capable of being a) ridiculously complacent and self-congratulatory, albeit in a very different way from the US, and b) striving for nothing more than being better than the Americans. And Michael Moore not caring about how the arguments he makes has an impact outside of the arguments he's currently making means that he doesn't care if he's looking at the big picture of, well, anything. I feel like his "change the world" strategy becomes limited as a result, and being an argument point rather than the target audience may skew my attitude on the subject. I also, honestly, think it's really weird that any Canadian gives a damn about seeing Sicko, because what the hell it has to do with us other than giving us another reason to puff up our chests completely escapes me, and yet it's playing in most of the theatres in town.
By the way, this post was initiated like two days ago, and I'm just now getting around to completing it. I expect it's really rather disjointed as a result. Not so much with the sleeping last night applies again, though, actually.
The allusion to something I was going to write about, a few posts ago, was Michael Moore and this new movie "Sicko". I hesitate to criticize Moore, because honestly, it seems like the "in" thing to do among people who are kind of getting leftier-than-thou, but I do think his approach is really problematic. Now, I haven't seen Sicko, so anything I'm saying about it is based mainly on the copious numbers of blog entries and publicity I've seen on the subject.
I actually think Moore is probably the quintessential example of the guy who will bend principle in terms of his methodology if it's politically expedient, which is essentially exactly what I was frustrated with in that "rape as drain on the system" argument that I posted about. It's interesting to observe his efficacy, given that. Sicko, from what I understand, has been insanely effective in getting people who would otherwise immediately bristle and shut down the conversation at the words "socialized medicine", like you just said "Beetlejuice, Beetlejuice, Beetlejuice" or something, talking about the absolute insanity that is the American health care system. And he does it by de-othering the ones who are being hurt, by raising that level of empathy in his middle-class viewers to the point where they start to see how it could affect them.
But he also "others" foreign countries, generally in the opposite way. I've had a few conversations/arguments about the ways in which putting women on an artificial pedestal of "closer to God by way of being closer to Mother Earth" or, less airily philosophically, through "chivalry" is the flip side of the social misogyny coin, because it prevents them from being allowed to be fully human. They're still being split off and "othered". To an extent, I feel like that's what Moore does to other countries in several of his films. I think it's easy to see some of the additional problems when we're talking about Cuba, but I hate his approach to Canada as well.
Here's the cutting to the chase on Michael Moore and his attitude toward Canada, and I assume other countries--I don't think he gives a damn that he's being inaccurate. I respect that he's a polemicist and whatever is outside the scope of his polemic is irrelevant to him. But just to be absolutely clear, I don't know anybody who's ever lived in Toronto who leaves their goddamn doors open and doesn't fear violence on any level. I think everyone knows that it's an enormous oversimplification to say that Canadians are uniformly thrilled with our health care system. What's worse for me is that the only thing I've really seen bring out, shall we say, hard core Canadian exceptionalism, is Michael Moore and the way he gives such publicity for the contrast between Canada and the US on exactly the things we want to distinguish us.
We as Canadians are way too capable of being a) ridiculously complacent and self-congratulatory, albeit in a very different way from the US, and b) striving for nothing more than being better than the Americans. And Michael Moore not caring about how the arguments he makes has an impact outside of the arguments he's currently making means that he doesn't care if he's looking at the big picture of, well, anything. I feel like his "change the world" strategy becomes limited as a result, and being an argument point rather than the target audience may skew my attitude on the subject. I also, honestly, think it's really weird that any Canadian gives a damn about seeing Sicko, because what the hell it has to do with us other than giving us another reason to puff up our chests completely escapes me, and yet it's playing in most of the theatres in town.
By the way, this post was initiated like two days ago, and I'm just now getting around to completing it. I expect it's really rather disjointed as a result. Not so much with the sleeping last night applies again, though, actually.