¡Viva WikiLeaks! SiCKO Was Not Banned in Cuba

[The Vegan Marxist]

¡Viva WikiLeaks! SiCKO Was Not Banned in Cuba
By Michael Moore
December 18th, 2010

Yesterday WikiLeaks did an amazing thing and released (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/139530) a classified State Department cable that dealt, in part, with me and my film, ‘Sicko.’

It is a stunning look at the Orwellian nature of how bureaucrats for the State spin their lies and try to recreate reality (I assume to placate their bosses and tell them what they want to hear).

The date is January 31, 2008. It is just days after ‘Sicko’ has been nominated for an Oscar as Best Documentary. This must have sent someone reeling in Bush’s State Department (his Treasury Department had already notified me they were investigating what laws I might have broken in taking three 9/11 first responders to Cuba to get them the health care they had been denied in the United States).

Former health insurance executive Wendell Potter recently revealed that the insurance industry — which had decided to spend millions to go after me and, if necessary, “push Michael Moore off a cliff (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byooYCO6-y4)” — had begun working with anti-Castro Cubans in Miami in order to have them speak out and smear my film.

So, on January 31, 2008, a State Department official stationed in Havana took a made up story and sent it back to his HQ in Washington. Here’s what they concocted:


XXXXXXXXXXXX stated that Cuban authorities have banned Michael Moore’s documentary, “Sicko,” as being subversive. Although the film’s intent is to discredit the U.S. healthcare system by highlighting the excellence of the Cuban system, he said the regime knows the film is a myth and does not want to risk a popular backlash by showing to Cubans facilities that are clearly not available to the vast majority of them.

Sounds convincing, eh?! There’s only one problem — ‘Sicko’ had just been playing in Cuban theaters. Then the entire nation of Cuba was shown the film on national television on April 25, 2008! The Cubans embraced the film so much so it became one of those rare American movies that received a theatrical distribution in Cuba. I personally ensured that a 35mm print got to the Film Institute in Havana. Screenings of ‘Sicko’ were set up in towns all across the country.

But the secret cable said Cubans were banned from seeing my movie. Hmmm.

We also know from another secret U.S. document that “the disenchantment of the masses [in Cuba] has spread through all the provinces,” and that “all of Oriente Province is seething with hate” for the Castro regime. There’s a huge active underground rebellion, and “workers there readily give all the support they can,” with everyone involved in “subtle sabotage” against the government. Morale is terrible throughout all the branches of the armed forces, and in the event of war the army “will not fight.” Wow — this cable is hot!

Of course, this secret U.S. cable is from March 31, 1961 (http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/bayofpigs/19610406.pdf), three weeks before Cuba kicked our asses at the Bay of Pigs.

The U.S. government has been passing around these “secret” documents to itself for the past fifty years, explaining in painstaking detail how horrible things are in Cuba and how Cubans are quietly aching for us to come back and take over. I don’t know why we write these cables, I guess it just makes us feel better about ourselves. (Anyone curious can find an entire museum (http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/latin_america/cuba.htm) of U.S. wish fulfillment cables on the website of the National Security Archive.)

So what do you do with about a false “secret” cable, especially one that involves you and your movie? Well, you wait for a responsible newspaper to investigate and shout what it discovers from the rooftops.

But yesterday WikiLeaks gave the ‘Sicko’ Cuba cable to the media — and what did they do with it? They ran it as if it were true! Here’s the headline in the Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/17/wikileaks-cuba-banned-sicko):


WikiLeaks: Cuba banned Sicko for depicting ‘mythical’ healthcare system

Authorities feared footage of gleaming hospital in Michael Moore’s Oscar-nominated film would provoke a popular backlash

And not one scintilla of digging to see if Cuba had actually banned the movie! In fact, just the opposite. The right wing press started to have a field day reporting a lie (Andy Levy of Fox (http://twitter.com/andylevy/status/15917659069612032) — twice (http://twitter.com/andylevy/status/15929311122948097) — Reason Magazine (http://reason.com/blog/2010/12/17/sicko-doesnt-meet-cuban-prop), Spectator (http://www.spectator.co.uk/nickcohen/6555588/michael-moore-stupid-white-man.thtml) and Hot Air (http://hotair.com/archives/2010/12/17/great-news-cuba-banned-michael-moore-documentary-for-being-too-rosy-about-cuban-health-care/), plus a slew of blogs (http://blogsearch.google.com/blogsearch?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&q=sicko+cuba+wikileaks&btnG=Search+Blogs)). Sadly, even BoingBoing (http://www.boingboing.net/2010/12/17/wikileakscablegate-c.html) and my friends at the Nation (http://www.thenation.com/blog/157178/blogging-wikileaks-news-views-friday-day-20) wrote about it without skepticism. So here you have WikiLeaks, who have put themselves on the line to find and release these cables to the press — and traditional journalists are once again just too lazy to lift a finger, point and click their mouse to log into Nexis or search via Google, and look to see if Cuba really did “ban the film.” Had just ONE reporter done that, here’s they would have found:


June 16, 2007 Saturday 1:41 AM GMT [that's 7 months before the false cable]

HEADLINE: Cuban health minister says Moore’s ‘Sicko’ shows ‘human values’ of communist system

BYLINE: By ANDREA RODRIGUEZ, Associated Press Writer

DATELINE: HAVANA

Cuba’s health minister Jose Ramon Balaguer said Friday that American filmmaker Michael Moore’s documentary ‘Sicko’ highlights the human values of the island’s communist-run government… “There can be no doubt this documentary by a personality like Mr. Michael Moore helps promote the profoundly human principles of Cuban society.”

Or, how ’bout this little April 25, 2008 notice from CubaSi.Cu (http://www.cubasi.cu/desktopdefault.aspx?spk=160&clk=195482&lk=1&ck=100358&spka=35) (translation by Google (http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=es&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cubasi.cu%2Fdesktopdefault.aspx %3Fspk%3D160%26clk%3D195482%26lk%3D1%26ck%3D100358 %26spka%3D35&act=url)):


Sicko premiere in Cuba

25/04/2008

The documentary Sicko, the U.S. filmmaker Michael Moore, which deals about the deplorable state of American health care system will be released today at 5:50 pm, for the space Cubavision Roundtable and the Education Channel.

Then there’s this from Juventudrebelde.cu (http://www.juventudrebelde.cu/cuba/2008-04-25/esta-tarde-estreno-del-documental-sicko-en-la-mesa-redonda/) (translation by Google (http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=es&tl=en&u=http:%2F%2Fwww.juventudrebelde.cu%2Fcuba%2F2008-04-25%2Festa-tarde-estreno-del-documental-sicko-en-la-mesa-redonda%2F)). Or this Cuban editorial (http://www.juventudrebelde.cu/opinion/2010-07-15/el-proximo-bocado/) (translation by Google (http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=es&u=http://www.juventudrebelde.cu/opinion/2010-07-15/el-proximo-bocado/&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dsite:juventudrebelde.cu%2B%2522michae l%2Bmoore%2522%2Bsicko%26num%3D100%26hl%3Den%26cli ent%3Dfirefox-a%26hs%3DF39%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26prmd%3Divnso&rurl=translate.google.com&twu=1)). There’s even a long clip of the Cuba section of ‘Sicko’ on the homepage of Media Roundtable on the CubaSi.cu website (http://media-tv-roundtable.cubasi.cu/)!

OK, so we know the media is lazy and sucks most of the time. But the bigger issue here is how our government seemed to be colluding with the health insurance industry to destroy a film that might have a hand in bringing about what the Cubans already have in their poverty-ridden third world country: free, universal health care. And because they have it and we don’t, Cuba has a better infant mortality rate (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2091rank.html?countryName=United%20States&countryCode=us&regionCode=na&rank=178) than we do, their life expectancy (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2102rank.html?countryCode=ao&rankAnchorRow=#ao) is just 7 months shorter than ours, and, according to the WHO, they rank just two places (http://static.michaelmoore.com/manual_img/10/12/cubarank.jpg) behind the richest country on earth in terms of the quality of their health care.

That’s the story, mainstream media and right-wing haters.

Now that you’ve been presented with the facts, what are you going to do about it? Are you gonna attack me for having my movie played on Cuban state television? Or are you gonna attack me for not having my movie played on Cuban state television?

You have to choose one, it can’t be both.

And since the facts show that the movie played on state TV and in theaters, I think you’re better off attacking me for having my films played in Cuba.

¡Viva WikiLeaks!

http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/mike-friends-blog/viva-wikileaks

[StalinFanboy]

Why is an article written by and about a liberal stroking his own ego on RevLeft?

[R_P_A_S]

Why is an article written by and about a liberal stroking his own ego on RevLeft?

because I appreciate it.

[Wanted Man]

Why is an article written by and about a liberal stroking his own ego on RevLeft?

Why are you on Revleft with your boring whining?

[Catma]

I think it's interesting to note the complete inaccuracy of even such a seemingly innocuous State Department cable.

I guess it could be that it was simply a quote of someone who didn't know what the fuck he was talking about... but then why is it being quoted to Washington? Maybe it was done in a period of confusion about what would happen regarding the film, but considering the circumstances that seems almost impossible.

Just generally embarrassing incompetence. :thumbup1:

[KurtFF8]

Why is an article written by and about a liberal stroking his own ego on RevLeft?

It's no secret that Moore has been moving to the Left over the past few years, and this specific media battle certainly provides a good counter point to those who try to paint Cuba an "evil censoring dictatorship!" or whatnot.

And Moore has quite a lot of respect amongst sectors of the American working class I would argue.

[RadioRaheem84]

Yeah, even after Moore called Cuba a poverty ridden third world country. :lol:

[cb9's_unity]

What isn't exciting about a popular American figure openly defending one of the most respectable parts of the Cuban system?

Forcing a segment of the American media and public to deal with success in Cuba is a big deal. Most Americans have literally heard nothing that contradicts the story that Cuba is a total failure in every way.

[KurtFF8]

Yeah, even after Moore called Cuba a poverty ridden third world country. :lol:

Did he say that in the film? And supporters of Cuba often point to their relatively poor position as a praise to their accomplishments like free health care and education

[Sean]

He said it in the main point of the thread, Kurt. He bandies between 'look how much better it is than here' and 'they're poor thats why its shitty'.

[KurtFF8]

He said it in the main point of the thread, Kurt. He bandies between 'look how much better it is than here' and 'they're poor thats why its shitty'.

Hmm, I didn't really see that in the article by Moore

[StalinFanboy]

Why are you on Revleft with your boring whining?

Because someone has to rain on this liberal-worshiping parade.

Seriously guys, this isn't even him trying to do anything other than rant on about how the Republicans don't like him and blah blah blah.

Two things

1) Of-fucking-course the US government isn't going to be down with a film that put anything American in a bad light. Especially if it shows a country that is supposed to be America's enemy in a good light.

2) Who gives a fuck in the Revolutionary Left (or rather... who should) about a movie that talks about the good ole days of capitalism right after WW2, or about a man that wants to take over the Democratic Party and push it in a "radical" direction. Which really means he thinks he can reform capitalism.

That second point is especially important. I think the reason why this isn't being posted with even a little criticism is because there are a lot of people on the Left who see the state as being a neutral tool, and therefore somewhat usable (even if in a different way than what Moore wants), rather than as an organ that developed within the context of capitalism and the bourgeois revolutions that ushered it in. I think people also have a conception of communism as being something ushered in by some policies created by some spectacular Great Leader or Party, rather than something that is consciously chosen and created by individuals acting collectively. Which is why it's possible for TVM to neg rep me and leave a comment about how I should be off "fapping over [my] anarchist literature" (who doesn't like to fap to awesome literature, by the way? - I think it may have been maldoror who posted something about there being a light, natural high that is created in the brain when you read something you agree with).

I don't think SiCKO will do anything positive for the recomposition of the proletarian towards communism. I really, truly don't. Revolution isn't going to be made by trying to out-propaganda the best propaganda machine ever. All SiCKO does is create another spectacle for the masses to consume. Only this time it's critical of America and capitalism (just like punk, hippie, etc. etc.). Why haven't the masses risen up after seeing SiCKO or reading the latest issue of whatever newspaper the PSL sells?

I'll tell you why. It's because revolutions are based in the material world, and only when the proletarian ceases to see itself as a part of this world, only when the proletarian decides it can no longer and will no longer live as commodities, and when their living conditions are under attack, will there be anything remotely resembling communist revolution.

[RedSonRising]

Because someone has to rain on this liberal-worshiping parade.

Seriously guys, this isn't even him trying to do anything other than rant on about how the Republicans don't like him and blah blah blah.

Two things

1) Of-fucking-course the US government isn't going to be down with a film that put anything American in a bad light. Especially if it shows a country that is supposed to be America's enemy in a good light.

2) Who gives a fuck in the Revolutionary Left (or rather... who should) about a movie that talks about the good ole days of capitalism right after WW2, or about a man that wants to take over the Democratic Party and push it in a "radical" direction. Which really means he thinks he can reform capitalism.

That second point is especially important. I think the reason why this isn't being posted with even a little criticism is because there are a lot of people on the Left who see the state as being a neutral tool, and therefore somewhat usable (even if in a different way than what Moore wants), rather than as an organ that developed within the context of capitalism and the bourgeois revolutions that ushered it in. I think people also have a conception of communism as being something ushered in by some policies created by some spectacular Great Leader or Party, rather than something that is consciously chosen and created by individuals acting collectively. Which is why it's possible for TVM to neg rep me and leave a comment about how I should be off "fapping over [my] anarchist literature" (who doesn't like to fap to awesome literature, by the way? - I think it may have been maldoror who posted something about there being a light, natural high that is created in the brain when you read something you agree with).

I don't think SiCKO will do anything positive for the recomposition of the proletarian towards communism. I really, truly don't. Revolution isn't going to be made by trying to out-propaganda the best propaganda machine ever. All SiCKO does is create another spectacle for the masses to consume. Only this time it's critical of America and capitalism (just like punk, hippie, etc. etc.). Why haven't the masses risen up after seeing SiCKO or reading the latest issue of whatever newspaper the PSL sells?

I'll tell you why. It's because revolutions are based in the material world, and only when the proletarian ceases to see itself as a part of this world, only when the proletarian decides it can no longer and will no longer live as commodities, and when their living conditions are under attack, will there be anything remotely resembling communist revolution.


I don't disagree with your main points, but you have to understand that in order to relate the concepts of capitalist oppression to white working/middle class viewers, Moore has to use comparative material reference points in the history of the United States. Higher education and habitation were much cheaper in the 70's than it is now, and this speaks to people unfamiliar with revolutionary politics much more than complex theory would. People who cannot access healthcare, and the non-politicized people who can, need to have a comparative basis to understand that even in the richest country in the world, the working masses have little control over the decisions which affect their lives. I don't think Moore is doing the whole job by taking softer positions while hoping for socialism, but he is allowing people to see systemic errors within the economy and the state which make it easier for the revolutionary left to organize with working class communities and radicalize their politics.

Moore does much more good than harm attacking the symptoms of Capitalism in the United States and making such criticisms available to the general public; it's not his job to organize the people in an effort to overthrow the global hierarchy- that is where leadership of many activists groups, with which many here toil to coordinate with, drop the ball. He is progressively dismantling the myths of US democracy and meritocracy. He does more good than harm for the advancement of working class interests with his films. I'm grateful I can talk to a person unfamiliar with anti-capitalist schools of thought, and am glad I can point to a film like Capitalism: A Love Story for an accessible introduction to the everyday contemporary problems faced by society under capitalist rule. You should be as well.

[punisa]

I'm grateful I can talk to a person unfamiliar with anti-capitalist schools of thought, and am glad I can point to a film like Capitalism: A Love Story for an accessible introduction to the everyday contemporary problems faced by society under capitalist rule.

This. I agree with you 100%

[Black Sheep]

Yeah, even after Moore called Cuba a poverty ridden third world country. :lol:
He was being ironic.

His point was 'they tell me this is a poverty ridden 3rd world country'---->'it can provide super awesome health care a few minutes later'

[Wanted Man]

Because someone has to rain on this liberal-worshiping parade.

TL;DR

I think you've just wasted 15 minutes, because this whole rant has nothing to do with the thread at all. It's just your massive presumption that there is "liberal-worshipping" or that people don't have other criticisms of Moore.

Your line is basically that "revolutionaries" should lock themselves away in an ivory tower, reading only literature that they agree with (and then masturbating to it, apparently...), remaining aloof from the rest of society because it is "bourgeois"; only workers who join us in this are considered "worthy".

Therefore, news articles like this should be censored from Revleft for being unproletarian, or at least we should apply self-censorship and not discuss current events on this forum ourselves, because that implies acceptance of bourgeois order.

I hope I don't need to explain to anyone here what's problematic about this.

[Fabrizio]

Because someone has to rain on this liberal-worshiping parade.

Seriously guys, this isn't even him trying to do anything other than rant on about how the Republicans don't like him and blah blah blah.

Two things

1) Of-fucking-course the US government isn't going to be down with a film that put anything American in a bad light. Especially if it shows a country that is supposed to be America's enemy in a good light.

2) Who gives a fuck in the Revolutionary Left (or rather... who should) about a movie that talks about the good ole days of capitalism right after WW2, or about a man that wants to take over the Democratic Party and push it in a "radical" direction. Which really means he thinks he can reform capitalism.

That second point is especially important. I think the reason why this isn't being posted with even a little criticism is because there are a lot of people on the Left who see the state as being a neutral tool, and therefore somewhat usable (even if in a different way than what Moore wants), rather than as an organ that developed within the context of capitalism and the bourgeois revolutions that ushered it in. I think people also have a conception of communism as being something ushered in by some policies created by some spectacular Great Leader or Party, rather than something that is consciously chosen and created by individuals acting collectively. Which is why it's possible for TVM to neg rep me and leave a comment about how I should be off "fapping over [my] anarchist literature" (who doesn't like to fap to awesome literature, by the way? - I think it may have been maldoror who posted something about there being a light, natural high that is created in the brain when you read something you agree with).

I don't think SiCKO will do anything positive for the recomposition of the proletarian towards communism. I really, truly don't. Revolution isn't going to be made by trying to out-propaganda the best propaganda machine ever. All SiCKO does is create another spectacle for the masses to consume. Only this time it's critical of America and capitalism (just like punk, hippie, etc. etc.). Why haven't the masses risen up after seeing SiCKO or reading the latest issue of whatever newspaper the PSL sells?

I'll tell you why. It's because revolutions are based in the material world, and only when the proletarian ceases to see itself as a part of this world, only when the proletarian decides it can no longer and will no longer live as commodities, and when their living conditions are under attack, will there be anything remotely resembling communist revolution.

In other words it's counter-revolutionary to even discuss films by non-revolutionaries. great, I can't wait for that anarchist society where we'll all be free to read only anarchist literature.

[StalinFanboy]

I think you've just wasted 15 minutes, because this whole rant has nothing to do with the thread at all. It's just your massive presumption that there is "liberal-worshipping" or that people don't have other criticisms of Moore.

Your line is basically that "revolutionaries" should lock themselves away in an ivory tower, reading only literature that they agree with (and then masturbating to it, apparently...), remaining aloof from the rest of society because it is "bourgeois"; only workers who join us in this are considered "worthy".

Therefore, news articles like this should be censored from Revleft for being unproletarian, or at least we should apply self-censorship and not discuss current events on this forum ourselves, because that implies acceptance of bourgeois order.

I hope I don't need to explain to anyone here what's problematic about this.

Nah. I actually liked SiCKO when I saw it. Of course I disagreed with a lot of it, and it is not necessarily something I would recommend to someone primarily because I don't think it's necessary to convince people that capitalism is "bad." I think the role of revolutionaries is to be very firm in our class position and not water down our critiques of capitalism so as to appeal to less radical people. Our role is to be critical of both capital and the rest of the Left and to be as uncompromising as possible in this. Maybe during times of counter-revolution when the class is weak will we be alienated from "the masses" as communists and the strength of the Left will reflect the weakness of the class, but during times of crisis and when the class is strong, the "Left" will be stronger too.

What's problematic about your post is that you equate RevLeft with real life. No where did I say that we should retreat to an "ivory tower." Questioning why something by a liberal about a liberal is being posted on RevLeft with very little to no criticism is not "retreating to an ivory tower." You are not engaging with anyone other than other communists and anarchists on RevLeft. So it hardly makes any sense to accuse me of not wanting to engage with non-communist people when none of us are doing that when we post on RevLeft. It makes more sense to use RevLeft to be ultra-critical about things like this to clarify our own positions and have those positions and critiques available for the curious non-communist people that occasionally stumble across RevLeft. It doesn't make any sense for people who very much for the destruction of capitalism to be applauding a movie that talks about the good ole days of capitalism in reference to the Fifties.

If ya'll want to discuss the movie, awesome I won't try to stop you, but why do it in Politics, unless ya'll are going to be critical of it and Michael Moore?

[StalinFanboy]

I don't disagree with your main points, but you have to understand that in order to relate the concepts of capitalist oppression to white working/middle class viewers, Moore has to use comparative material reference points in the history of the United States. Higher education and habitation were much cheaper in the 70's than it is now, and this speaks to people unfamiliar with revolutionary politics much more than complex theory would. People who cannot access healthcare, and the non-politicized people who can, need to have a comparative basis to understand that even in the richest country in the world, the working masses have little control over the decisions which affect their lives. I don't think Moore is doing the whole job by taking softer positions while hoping for socialism, but he is allowing people to see systemic errors within the economy and the state which make it easier for the revolutionary left to organize with working class communities and radicalize their politics.

Moore does much more good than harm attacking the symptoms of Capitalism in the United States and making such criticisms available to the general public; it's not his job to organize the people in an effort to overthrow the global hierarchy- that is where leadership of many activists groups, with which many here toil to coordinate with, drop the ball. He is progressively dismantling the myths of US democracy and meritocracy. He does more good than harm for the advancement of working class interests with his films. I'm grateful I can talk to a person unfamiliar with anti-capitalist schools of thought, and am glad I can point to a film like Capitalism: A Love Story for an accessible introduction to the everyday contemporary problems faced by society under capitalist rule. You should be as well.
I guess it really comes down to a difference in views of what the Left is and how revolution is created.

I think it's weird (and maybe you aren't saying this exactly) that you need a film, especially one like SiCKO, to talk about the horrors and downfalls of capitalism with someone. Where I live, I can point to growing rate of unemployment, the housing crisis, police murders, the privitization of public space, etc., to point out exactly how capitalism fucks us. I think that's far more real than pointing to a movie. But, again, maybe you weren't saying that.

[RedSonRising]

I guess it really comes down to a difference in views of what the Left is and how revolution is created.

I think it's weird (and maybe you aren't saying this exactly) that you need a film, especially one like SiCKO, to talk about the horrors and downfalls of capitalism with someone. Where I live, I can point to growing rate of unemployment, the housing crisis, police murders, the privitization of public space, etc., to point out exactly how capitalism fucks us. I think that's far more real than pointing to a movie. But, again, maybe you weren't saying that.


Well some people who would ideologically align with revolutionary forces if the political opportunity were presented, basically anyone in the middle class with enough compassion and freedom from bias, do not experience these things daily and don't use the resources of comfort they have to help mobilize around anti-capitalist approaches.

For the people that DO struggle with these things, it is often experienced as a subjective thing in a neighborhood or community with the blatant acceptance that this is how the system works, but not why or how it is connected to the larger structure. Many people think it is specific policy or law or party in power that contributes to these conditions, and do not realize how the mechanics of the capitalist state directly trump the well-being of the country. Most of the proletariat is not politicized under class consciousness. The hierarchy created by the law of property is something a lot of people do not grasp as an inherent causal force to injustice.

Michael Moore's movie is far from an instruction manual for implementing the Labor Theory of Value and whatnot, but he shows direct links between members of the economic ruling class as constituents and their pocketed statesmen running the show. Removing illusions of hard work = success and the idea the people have control over decisions in this country are the first steps to popularizing anti-systemic attitudes. Like I said, a movie on such things alone is not going to radicalize the masses, but it helps a lot of people think critically about social issues without assuming capitalism is the only way, and helps them take a second look at what could otherwise be unworthy proposals at alternative economic/political systems. 3 of the last 5 most popular documentaries in the last ten years are his, and we should be glad he is further radicalizing.

Already in my university classes, students from different class backgrounds are able to identify private enterprise as the root of an array of sociological conundrums. Some claim there are no alternatives, but that's where I raise my hand and educate them on the historical successes of revolutionary communities, and it has an effect it might not have beforehand if someone like Michael Moore wasn't spreading the relatable truth about this government for a 9 dollar ticket admission every few years.