We Debate Michael Moore for all the Wrong Reasons

My remedial detective skills have led me to detect a peculiar line of reasoning among reviewers of Michael Moore's recent film Sicko. Many open with the intriguing proclamation "it's (the film) one-sided but it's sure to make you think." As if all that follows is to be excused.

If only it's that easy. If it were, the world would be flooded with half-assed philosophers and suspect scholars.

Michael Moore is a predictable bore.

I've heard people defend Moore on the premise that he is just a film maker; that the criticism hurled upon him are unjust if not plain unreasonable. After all, we're missing, according to this testimony, the point. Still, some have found the courage to take dead aim at Moore.

Perhaps. However, Moore paints himself as more than just a film maker. He willingly enters the public foray and political arena. As such, he's fair game.

Welcome to Rome. And when in Rome....

What Moore's films have led me to wonder is what good is an intellectual debate if the root of its tenets are deliberately flawed, manipulated and mutilated?

With any powerful medium, there is such a thing as intellectual honesty and discipline.

As for his ridiculous Cuban escapade and flaunting of the Canadian health care system as some sort of paradise, I can assure you that all he has done is present the best of our system with the worst of the American one. There is no integrity or truth to be discovered.

How can there be? Moore stole that from the viewer.

Image from Mackay Editorial Cartoons.