Ian Nicholson wrote:
>I'm going to de-lurk to point out that what worries me is that Mr.
Olson
>provides the above quote "in order to shed some light on the
thought
>processes" of Michael Moore.
>What he seems to be doing
is making an attempt to bias the reader
>against Moore. He has
taken a quote out of context in such a way as to
>make Moore appear to be
anti-Small Business.
>When you look at the quote *in* context, it's clear
that Moore is
>talking about a specific group of people in Flint, *not*
Small Business
>Owners in general.
To the contrary, if you read the article in which the quote originally
appeared, and for which I provided a link, you will discover that the statement
was made in reference to a proposed local ordinance in Arcata, California, that
would limit the number of chain restaurants that could locate in that town. If
he did not intend his characterization of the small businesses in his
hometown of Davison, Michigan, to be interpreted as representative of small
businesses elsewhere, including Arcata, why would he make that
characterization in this context? It wouldn't make sense.
Here is the entire relevant section of the article:
"Asked about Arcata limiting the number of pattern restaurants to nine,
Moore said he didn't think it was a good idea. But what if corporate dominance
transforms Arcata into 'Anywhere, USA?' 'You are in Anywhere, USA,' Moore
said.
"Moore seemed to embrace capitalistic Darwinism. 'If the small businesses
suck they'll be driven out of business," he said. "If they got a good
restaurant, people will go there and eat. You know in my town the small
businesses that everyone wanted to protect? They were the people that supported
all the right-wing groups. They were the Republicans in the town, they were in
the Kiwanas, the Chamber of Commerce - people that kept the town all white. The
small hardware salesman, the small clothing store salespersons, Jesse the Barber
who signed his name three different times on three different petitions to recall
me from the school board. F**k all these small businesses - f**k 'em all! Bring
in the chains. The small businesspeople are the rednecks that run the town and
suppress the people. F**k 'em all. That's how I feel.'"(1)
>And how does this relate to F9/11?
As I stated in my post, it doesn't relate directly to the movie, but it
helps to understand the mindset of the filmmaker. This is important because
Moore defends his movies and books by saying that they are only expressions of
his personal viewpoint, and should only be held to the standards of
accuracy expected of an opinion piece. In a June 20 interview with George
Stephanopoulos, in which Stephanopoulos questions the film's accuracy, Moore
states:
"It's an op-ed piece. It's my opinion about the last four years of the Bush
administration. And that's what I call it. I'm not trying to pretend that this
is some sort of, you know, fair and balanced work of journalism, even though
those who use the words "fair and balanced" often aren't that, but�"(2)
>If Mr Olson thinks that this has a bearing on the Walmart Issue, then
he
>should post it as part of that thread.
>*Not* in an unrelated
thread as an attempt to bias the readers.
While reading about Moore, I came across the Arcata statement, and thought
it had relevance to Winona (since competition between local businesses and
national chains seems to be a hot issue there) as well as providing some
insights into Moore's worldview. Since I was already writing a post about
Moore, I included the statement as a side note to that post. Maybe I should
have posted it as a separate message, perhaps as part of the Wal-Mart
thread. But would that have made it any less likely to "bias the readers"?
-Gary Olson
(2)"Heat Is On: Filmmaker Michael Moore Takes on Factual Challenges to
Fahrenheit 9/11"
