But don't take my word for it

I always thought it was the kids who said that, upon reviewing the book.

M. Mash, I agree with you completely. And I do think what Michael Moore is doing is an incredibly important thing. However, it's just as dangerous to say "Hey, we can trust Michael Moore" and internalize his ideas without doing a little of our own research to verify it, and even more importantly; to do some "soul-searching" and stop and ask ourselves "given the facts, what do I think?". It's too easy for people to say "hey, Mr. Moore thinks this, so I do too". Agreeing with Michael Moore without questioning his own biases is somewhat ironically defeating his own agenda. Ultimately he's trying to get people (especially in Fahrenheit 9/11) to understand that we're being spoon-fed bullshit (aka "propaganda") at all times on all fronts. It's a sad fact that tens-of-thousands (if not millions) of Fahrenheit 9/11 viewers will say "yep, that film looks about right" and not stop for a second to question it. Although this is kind of a good thing since it's providing a counter-assault against Bush's twisted version of the truth, it's not a real solution to anything at all; that's just people behaving the same as they did before, except they're mindlessly following a new leader. Of course, if somebody persuasive enough (like Moore) can tap into that and sway some opinions toward a truer point-of-view, that's obviously a good thing... but unless people actively change the way they arrive at their decisions, we're ultimately fighting a losing battle.

All I'm really trying to say is that changing opinions only goes so far. Changing your way-of-life... specifically the way you view, and how you question your environment on a second-to-second basis is the only way we will ever accomplish any amount of REAL change. Changing minds is easy, changing people is another matter altogether.

In my last post I left you with the title of a Morcheeba album: "Who Can You Trust?"

If you think you truly understand what I'm trying to say, I implore you to stop reading for just a second and ask yourself what the answer to the question "WHO CAN YOU TRUST?" should be- do it RIGHT NOW BEFORE READING ANY FURTHER.


Did you do it?

Okay, if you did then continue reading.

So, what was your answer to the question? Was it something like this: "You can't trust ANYONE. You can only trust yourself."? Was it? And now once again I implore you to stop reading and take a second to ask yourself whether or not you agree with the answer "no one but yourself" before you continue reading.

So... do you agree with it? Is it YES, or is it NO? If you've decided, then please continue reading.

Well, if you agreed that the answer to "Who can you trust?" is "no one but yourself", then I'm completely and utterly disappointed. In my limited experience, the only answer to that question is "Trust no one; even and especially yourself."

And it is that one very answer which I believe is the very truest essence of punk. For me, that is the lowest-common-denominator of absolute truth in this universe.

Or as Reading Rainbow's LeVar Burton so aptly put it, "But don't take my word for it".

kiss my ass paras

i havent seen farenheit 9/11 yet but im planning on it... as for moore's 'distortion' of the facts to heighten the presention of a particular ideological viewpoint, i still find him more honest than just about any other media outlet, at least in america... hes upfront about the ideology that informs his worldview, so when u watch any piece of work by him ure aware of that and can watch it accordingly.... not like 90% of media that wraps itself in a false shroud of objectivity, as if thats ever possible to achieve... its dangerous to read anything and believe that its a completely objective, unbiased point of view, every single thing in the media is driven a particular ideology..... even if what is presented is 100% factually correct, whats left out is just as important, and u have to ask why did they leave this or that piece of information out.... so moore twisted some facts to better fit the argument he presented and amke a flashier movie, so what... in this day and age how information is presented is just as or more important than what is actually being said... if it doesnt look and sound good then people wont consume it, just like they wont consume a shitty-looking pair of sneakers... its no different than what occurs on fox tv, cnn, cbc, new york times, globe and mail, etc....besides in the realm of human affairs how many solid facts are there.... sure the sky is blue and shit dont smell too good, but other than that everything can be distorted one way or another depending on the ideology u view the world through, like sunglasses with lenses of different colours... to an anti-choice (even the decision to choose that term is ideological, as opposed to pro-life) advocate it is a fact that abortion is the murder of an unborn baby, but a pro-lifer would definitely not agree with that.... it is downright foolish to demand objectivity from the media in a world ruled by subjectivity, the best u can do is to inform yourself of the ideology the information u are consuming is being filtered through, and either regard or disreagrd it accordingly

this eric-esque philosophical diatribe brought to you by, with lots of love,

M.Mash

Careful, Beck... You're starting to sound like Percy...

... Then I'll really be in trouble.

Yeah....
I still think a few well planned assassinations would be a good thing.

Bear in mind that Michael Moore DID in fact edit some of the clips featured in the movie to make it not entirely 100% true. But I s'pose you could argue it's an artistic-discretion designed to get an idea across.

Or as Morcheeba more eloquently put it:
"Who can you trust?"

Just saw Fahrenheit 9/11
Very well done, if you didn't already hate Bush, government and rich people you will after seeing this. If you did hate them, you will be reminded of why you do.
Hell, I feel like seeing how many people would chip in $5 for a few good assassinations!